Remove CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode.CLOCK mode.

[agura]

Maxim,

About SER_VER_COMPARATOR. You can use code branch that executes when
times are equal:

int nodeOrder1 = ver1.nodeOrder();
int nodeOrder2 = ver2.nodeOrder();

if (nodeOrder1 == nodeOrder2) {
    long order1 = ver1.order();
    long order2 = ver2.order();

    assert order1 != order2;

    return order1 > order2 ? 1 : -1;
}
else
    return nodeOrder1 > nodeOrder2 ? 1 : -1;

On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 6:32 PM, Alexey Goncharuk
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> Maxim,
>
> Global time comparison is only needed for CLOCK mode, so you should modify
> the code as if ignoreTime is always true.
>
> 2017-03-06 18:13 GMT+03:00 Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>:
>
>> ok,
>> in GridCacheAtomicVersionComparator class, method
>> compare(GridCacheVersion one, GridCacheVersion other, boolean ignoreTime)
>> if (globalTime == otherGlobalTime || ignoreTime) {  // => if (ignoreTime) {
>> .....
>> }
>> else
>>     return globalTime > otherGlobalTime ? 1 : -1;   // => return -1;
>>
>> and,
>> GridCacheMvcc class,
>> SER_VER_COMPARATOR is comparator by globalTime var. His remove and remove
>> compareSerializableVersion?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > 6 марта 2017 г., в 16:51, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]> написал(а):
>> >
>> > Maxim,
>> >
>> > updateTime() method should be removed.
>> >
>> > On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 12:12 PM, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>> >> In CacheEntryImplEx class use ver.globalTime() in
>> >>
>> >> @Override public long updateTime() {
>> >>    return ver.globalTime();
>> >> }
>> >>
>> >> Than is better to replace this variable?
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>> 3 марта 2017 г., в 19:19, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]> написал(а):
>> >>>
>> >>> Maxim,
>> >>>
>> >>> I think the next implementation will be good enough:
>> >>>
>> >>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() {
>> >>>   return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(nodeOrderDrId, topVer), order);
>> >>> }
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Serialization/deserialization of GridCacheVersion.globalTime field
>> >>> should be removed.
>> >>>
>> >>> On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 5:57 PM, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>> >>>> Alexey,
>> >>>>
>> >>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() {
>> >>>>   return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(nodeOrderDrId << 32, topVer << 32),
>> order);
>> >>>> }
>> >>>>
>> >>>> So you want to change or not?
>> >>>>
>> >>>> And
>> >>>> - GridCacheVersion.writeTo(ByteBuffer buf, MessageWriter writer)
>> >>>> - GridCacheVersion.readFrom(ByteBuffer buf, MessageReader reader)
>> >>>>
>> >>>> use globalTime variable, must be removed case 0: (in both methods) or
>> replace globalTime?
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> 2 марта 2017 г., в 16:58, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]> написал(а):
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> +1
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Removing of asGridUuid() method can lead to much code changes but it
>> >>>>> should be avoided on this step.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 4:56 PM, Alexey Goncharuk
>> >>>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> >>>>>> Maxim,
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> I see several usages of asGridUuid() method, so I would just remove
>> global
>> >>>>>> time and use nodeOrderDrId and topVer as different parts of high
>> and low
>> >>>>>> parts of the embedded UUID.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> --AG
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> 2017-03-02 12:39 GMT+03:00 Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>:
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Andrey,
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> When removed parameter globalTime, in method:
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() {
>> >>>>>>>  return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(((long)topVer << 32) |
>> nodeOrderDrId,
>> >>>>>>> globalTime), order);
>> >>>>>>> }
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> globalTime parameter replaced by something or remove this method?
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> 2 марта 2017 г., в 12:07, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>
>> >>>>>>> написал(а):
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Andrey,
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Please review PR again.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 18:47, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]>
>> написал(а):
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> I think that it is ok.
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 6:34 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
>> [hidden email]>
>> >>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>> Ok. What do you say for the rest?
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 18:15, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]>
>> написал(а):
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> I think that during renaming we should not lose "Atomic"
>> prefix.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 5:16 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
>> [hidden email]>
>> >>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey, ok.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Also remove in the modules/platform/dotnet
>> >>>>>>> CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode.cs?
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Rename classes:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.startGrids ->
>> >>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.startGridsLocal (commit)
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderWithStoreInvokeTest ->
>> >>>>>>> IgniteCacheWithStoreInvokeTest
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderInvokeTest ->
>> >>>>>>> IgniteCacheInvokeTest
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderNearEnabledStoreValueTest
>> ->
>> >>>>>>> IgniteCacheNearEnabledStoreValueTest
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderNearRemoveFailureTest ->
>> >>>>>>> GridCacheNearRemoveFailureTest
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderRemoveFailureTest ->
>> >>>>>>> GridCacheRemoveFailureTest
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderFailoverSelfTest ->
>> >>>>>>> GridCacheFailoverSelfTest
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheValueConsistencyAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderNearEnabledS
>> elfTest
>> >>>>>>> -> GridCacheValueConsistencyNearEnabledSelfTest
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryAsyncFailoverAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>> ->
>> >>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryAsyncFailoverSelfTest
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryFailoverAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>> ->
>> >>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryFailoverSelfTest
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.testNoBackupsPrimaryWriteOrder
>> ->
>> >>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.testNoBackups
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.
>> testWithBackupsPrimaryWriteOrder
>> >>>>>>> -> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.testWithBackups
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Remove classes:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderStoreValueTest
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheReplicatedAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderMultiNodeFullApiSe
>> lfTest
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderMultiNodeFullApiSelfTest
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderMultiNodeP2PDisabledFullApiS
>> elfTest
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWrityOrderOffHeapMultiNodeFullApiSelfT
>> est
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderOffHeapFullApiSelfTest
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderFullApiSelfTest
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderReloadAllSelfTest
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCachePutRetryAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheValueConsistencyAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderExpiryPolicyTest
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> ok? :)
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 2:04, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]>
>> написал(а):
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> No, it should be removed. If somebody use entry last update
>> time
>> >>>>>>> (e.g.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> for conflict resolving) they should store this time as entry
>> field.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 12:57 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Do we still need GridClockSyncProcessor?
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 5:26 AM, Andrey Gura <
>> [hidden email]>
>> >>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, this setting doesn't make sense anymore. So we need
>> remove
>> >>>>>>> all
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> related methods.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Also there is component called GridClockSyncProcessor that
>> also
>> >>>>>>> should
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be removed. It will lead to removing globalTime field from
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheVersion class and some related methods.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 3:21 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
>> >>>>>>> [hidden email]>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Valentin,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then there is no need for setting CacheConfiguration.
>> >>>>>>> atomicWriteOrderMode.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What do you think, remove it and and related methods?
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 28 февр. 2017 г., в 2:49, Valentin Kulichenko <
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email]> написал(а):
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Max,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In case we remove the CLOCK mode, I think we should
>> remove the
>> >>>>>>> enum
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> too, as
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> well as configuration properties and other code using
>> this
>> >>>>>>> enum. Having
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enum with one value doesn't make sense to me.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Val
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 5:09 AM, Kozlov Maxim <
>> >>>>>>> [hidden email]>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Igniters,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> After remove CLOCK mode, CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode enum
>> >>>>>>> contains now
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> only
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> one value PRIMARY. Andrey Gura, proposition remove
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode enum. Will there be something
>> >>>>>>> special for
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> purpose is enum?
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jira: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4587
>> <
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4587>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> --
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> --
>> >>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>> >>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> --
>> >>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>> >>>>>>>> Max K.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> --
>> >>>>>>> Best Regards,
>> >>>>>>> Max K.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> --
>> >>>> Best Regards,
>> >>>> Max K.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Best Regards,
>> >> Max K.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>> --
>> Best Regards,
>> Max K.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>

[Kozlov Maxim]

Andrey, in GridTimeSyncProcessorSelfTest class methods: testTimeSync() and testTimeSyncChangeCoordinator() also removed?

> 6 марта 2017 г., в 18:42, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]> написал(а):
>
> Maxim,
>
> About SER_VER_COMPARATOR. You can use code branch that executes when
> times are equal:
>
> int nodeOrder1 = ver1.nodeOrder();
> int nodeOrder2 = ver2.nodeOrder();
>
> if (nodeOrder1 == nodeOrder2) {
>    long order1 = ver1.order();
>    long order2 = ver2.order();
>
>    assert order1 != order2;
>
>    return order1 > order2 ? 1 : -1;
> }
> else
>    return nodeOrder1 > nodeOrder2 ? 1 : -1;
>
> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 6:32 PM, Alexey Goncharuk
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Maxim,
>>
>> Global time comparison is only needed for CLOCK mode, so you should modify
>> the code as if ignoreTime is always true.
>>
>> 2017-03-06 18:13 GMT+03:00 Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>:
>>
>>> ok,
>>> in GridCacheAtomicVersionComparator class, method
>>> compare(GridCacheVersion one, GridCacheVersion other, boolean ignoreTime)
>>> if (globalTime == otherGlobalTime || ignoreTime) {  // => if (ignoreTime) {
>>> .....
>>> }
>>> else
>>>    return globalTime > otherGlobalTime ? 1 : -1;   // => return -1;
>>>
>>> and,
>>> GridCacheMvcc class,
>>> SER_VER_COMPARATOR is comparator by globalTime var. His remove and remove
>>> compareSerializableVersion?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> 6 марта 2017 г., в 16:51, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]> написал(а):
>>>>
>>>> Maxim,
>>>>
>>>> updateTime() method should be removed.
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 12:12 PM, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>>>> In CacheEntryImplEx class use ver.globalTime() in
>>>>>
>>>>> @Override public long updateTime() {
>>>>>   return ver.globalTime();
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> Than is better to replace this variable?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> 3 марта 2017 г., в 19:19, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]> написал(а):
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think the next implementation will be good enough:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() {
>>>>>>  return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(nodeOrderDrId, topVer), order);
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Serialization/deserialization of GridCacheVersion.globalTime field
>>>>>> should be removed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 5:57 PM, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> Alexey,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() {
>>>>>>>  return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(nodeOrderDrId << 32, topVer << 32),
>>> order);
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So you want to change or not?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And
>>>>>>> - GridCacheVersion.writeTo(ByteBuffer buf, MessageWriter writer)
>>>>>>> - GridCacheVersion.readFrom(ByteBuffer buf, MessageReader reader)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> use globalTime variable, must be removed case 0: (in both methods) or
>>> replace globalTime?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2 марта 2017 г., в 16:58, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Removing of asGridUuid() method can lead to much code changes but it
>>>>>>>> should be avoided on this step.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 4:56 PM, Alexey Goncharuk
>>>>>>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I see several usages of asGridUuid() method, so I would just remove
>>> global
>>>>>>>>> time and use nodeOrderDrId and topVer as different parts of high
>>> and low
>>>>>>>>> parts of the embedded UUID.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --AG
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 2017-03-02 12:39 GMT+03:00 Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Andrey,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> When removed parameter globalTime, in method:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() {
>>>>>>>>>> return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(((long)topVer << 32) |
>>> nodeOrderDrId,
>>>>>>>>>> globalTime), order);
>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> globalTime parameter replaced by something or remove this method?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> 2 марта 2017 г., в 12:07, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>
>>>>>>>>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Please review PR again.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 18:47, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]>
>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I think that it is ok.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 6:34 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ok. What do you say for the rest?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 18:15, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]>
>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think that during renaming we should not lose "Atomic"
>>> prefix.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 5:16 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey, ok.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Also remove in the modules/platform/dotnet
>>>>>>>>>> CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode.cs?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rename classes:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.startGrids ->
>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.startGridsLocal (commit)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderWithStoreInvokeTest ->
>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheWithStoreInvokeTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderInvokeTest ->
>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheInvokeTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderNearEnabledStoreValueTest
>>> ->
>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheNearEnabledStoreValueTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderNearRemoveFailureTest ->
>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheNearRemoveFailureTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderRemoveFailureTest ->
>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheRemoveFailureTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderFailoverSelfTest ->
>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheFailoverSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheValueConsistencyAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderNearEnabledS
>>> elfTest
>>>>>>>>>> -> GridCacheValueConsistencyNearEnabledSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryAsyncFailoverAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>>> ->
>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryAsyncFailoverSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryFailoverAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>>> ->
>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryFailoverSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.testNoBackupsPrimaryWriteOrder
>>> ->
>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.testNoBackups
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.
>>> testWithBackupsPrimaryWriteOrder
>>>>>>>>>> -> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.testWithBackups
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Remove classes:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderStoreValueTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheReplicatedAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderMultiNodeFullApiSe
>>> lfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderMultiNodeFullApiSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderMultiNodeP2PDisabledFullApiS
>>> elfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWrityOrderOffHeapMultiNodeFullApiSelfT
>>> est
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderOffHeapFullApiSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderFullApiSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderReloadAllSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCachePutRetryAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheValueConsistencyAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderExpiryPolicyTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ok? :)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 2:04, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]>
>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No, it should be removed. If somebody use entry last update
>>> time
>>>>>>>>>> (e.g.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for conflict resolving) they should store this time as entry
>>> field.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 12:57 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Do we still need GridClockSyncProcessor?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 5:26 AM, Andrey Gura <
>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, this setting doesn't make sense anymore. So we need
>>> remove
>>>>>>>>>> all
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> related methods.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Also there is component called GridClockSyncProcessor that
>>> also
>>>>>>>>>> should
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be removed. It will lead to removing globalTime field from
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheVersion class and some related methods.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 3:21 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Valentin,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then there is no need for setting CacheConfiguration.
>>>>>>>>>> atomicWriteOrderMode.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What do you think, remove it and and related methods?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 28 февр. 2017 г., в 2:49, Valentin Kulichenko <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email]> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Max,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In case we remove the CLOCK mode, I think we should
>>> remove the
>>>>>>>>>> enum
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> too, as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> well as configuration properties and other code using
>>> this
>>>>>>>>>> enum. Having
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enum with one value doesn't make sense to me.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Val
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 5:09 AM, Kozlov Maxim <
>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Igniters,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> After remove CLOCK mode, CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode enum
>>>>>>>>>> contains now
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> only
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> one value PRIMARY. Andrey Gura, proposition remove
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode enum. Will there be something
>>>>>>>>>> special for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> purpose is enum?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jira: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4587
>>> <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4587>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Best Regards,
>>> Max K.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>

--
Best Regards,
Max K.

[Kozlov Maxim]

Andrey, or better remove GridTimeSyncProcessorSelfTest class?

> 7 марта 2017 г., в 12:21, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]> написал(а):
>
> Andrey, in GridTimeSyncProcessorSelfTest class methods: testTimeSync() and testTimeSyncChangeCoordinator() also removed?
>
>
>> 6 марта 2017 г., в 18:42, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]> написал(а):
>>
>> Maxim,
>>
>> About SER_VER_COMPARATOR. You can use code branch that executes when
>> times are equal:
>>
>> int nodeOrder1 = ver1.nodeOrder();
>> int nodeOrder2 = ver2.nodeOrder();
>>
>> if (nodeOrder1 == nodeOrder2) {
>>   long order1 = ver1.order();
>>   long order2 = ver2.order();
>>
>>   assert order1 != order2;
>>
>>   return order1 > order2 ? 1 : -1;
>> }
>> else
>>   return nodeOrder1 > nodeOrder2 ? 1 : -1;
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 6:32 PM, Alexey Goncharuk
>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> Maxim,
>>>
>>> Global time comparison is only needed for CLOCK mode, so you should modify
>>> the code as if ignoreTime is always true.
>>>
>>> 2017-03-06 18:13 GMT+03:00 Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>:
>>>
>>>> ok,
>>>> in GridCacheAtomicVersionComparator class, method
>>>> compare(GridCacheVersion one, GridCacheVersion other, boolean ignoreTime)
>>>> if (globalTime == otherGlobalTime || ignoreTime) {  // => if (ignoreTime) {
>>>> .....
>>>> }
>>>> else
>>>>   return globalTime > otherGlobalTime ? 1 : -1;   // => return -1;
>>>>
>>>> and,
>>>> GridCacheMvcc class,
>>>> SER_VER_COMPARATOR is comparator by globalTime var. His remove and remove
>>>> compareSerializableVersion?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> 6 марта 2017 г., в 16:51, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]> написал(а):
>>>>>
>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>
>>>>> updateTime() method should be removed.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 12:12 PM, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> In CacheEntryImplEx class use ver.globalTime() in
>>>>>>
>>>>>> @Override public long updateTime() {
>>>>>>  return ver.globalTime();
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Than is better to replace this variable?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 3 марта 2017 г., в 19:19, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]> написал(а):
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think the next implementation will be good enough:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() {
>>>>>>> return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(nodeOrderDrId, topVer), order);
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Serialization/deserialization of GridCacheVersion.globalTime field
>>>>>>> should be removed.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 5:57 PM, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Alexey,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() {
>>>>>>>> return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(nodeOrderDrId << 32, topVer << 32),
>>>> order);
>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So you want to change or not?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And
>>>>>>>> - GridCacheVersion.writeTo(ByteBuffer buf, MessageWriter writer)
>>>>>>>> - GridCacheVersion.readFrom(ByteBuffer buf, MessageReader reader)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> use globalTime variable, must be removed case 0: (in both methods) or
>>>> replace globalTime?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 2 марта 2017 г., в 16:58, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Removing of asGridUuid() method can lead to much code changes but it
>>>>>>>>> should be avoided on this step.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 4:56 PM, Alexey Goncharuk
>>>>>>>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I see several usages of asGridUuid() method, so I would just remove
>>>> global
>>>>>>>>>> time and use nodeOrderDrId and topVer as different parts of high
>>>> and low
>>>>>>>>>> parts of the embedded UUID.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --AG
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 2017-03-02 12:39 GMT+03:00 Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> When removed parameter globalTime, in method:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() {
>>>>>>>>>>> return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(((long)topVer << 32) |
>>>> nodeOrderDrId,
>>>>>>>>>>> globalTime), order);
>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> globalTime parameter replaced by something or remove this method?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2 марта 2017 г., в 12:07, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>
>>>>>>>>>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Please review PR again.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 18:47, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]>
>>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think that it is ok.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 6:34 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ok. What do you say for the rest?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 18:15, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]>
>>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think that during renaming we should not lose "Atomic"
>>>> prefix.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 5:16 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey, ok.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Also remove in the modules/platform/dotnet
>>>>>>>>>>> CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode.cs?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rename classes:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.startGrids ->
>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.startGridsLocal (commit)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderWithStoreInvokeTest ->
>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheWithStoreInvokeTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderInvokeTest ->
>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheInvokeTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderNearEnabledStoreValueTest
>>>> ->
>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheNearEnabledStoreValueTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderNearRemoveFailureTest ->
>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheNearRemoveFailureTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderRemoveFailureTest ->
>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheRemoveFailureTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderFailoverSelfTest ->
>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheFailoverSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheValueConsistencyAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderNearEnabledS
>>>> elfTest
>>>>>>>>>>> -> GridCacheValueConsistencyNearEnabledSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryAsyncFailoverAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>>>> ->
>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryAsyncFailoverSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryFailoverAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>>>> ->
>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryFailoverSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.testNoBackupsPrimaryWriteOrder
>>>> ->
>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.testNoBackups
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.
>>>> testWithBackupsPrimaryWriteOrder
>>>>>>>>>>> -> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.testWithBackups
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Remove classes:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderStoreValueTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheReplicatedAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderMultiNodeFullApiSe
>>>> lfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderMultiNodeFullApiSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderMultiNodeP2PDisabledFullApiS
>>>> elfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWrityOrderOffHeapMultiNodeFullApiSelfT
>>>> est
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderOffHeapFullApiSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderFullApiSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderReloadAllSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCachePutRetryAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheValueConsistencyAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderExpiryPolicyTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ok? :)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 2:04, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]>
>>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No, it should be removed. If somebody use entry last update
>>>> time
>>>>>>>>>>> (e.g.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for conflict resolving) they should store this time as entry
>>>> field.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 12:57 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Do we still need GridClockSyncProcessor?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 5:26 AM, Andrey Gura <
>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, this setting doesn't make sense anymore. So we need
>>>> remove
>>>>>>>>>>> all
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> related methods.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Also there is component called GridClockSyncProcessor that
>>>> also
>>>>>>>>>>> should
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be removed. It will lead to removing globalTime field from
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheVersion class and some related methods.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 3:21 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Valentin,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then there is no need for setting CacheConfiguration.
>>>>>>>>>>> atomicWriteOrderMode.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What do you think, remove it and and related methods?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 28 февр. 2017 г., в 2:49, Valentin Kulichenko <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email]> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Max,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In case we remove the CLOCK mode, I think we should
>>>> remove the
>>>>>>>>>>> enum
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> too, as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> well as configuration properties and other code using
>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>>> enum. Having
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enum with one value doesn't make sense to me.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Val
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 5:09 AM, Kozlov Maxim <
>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Igniters,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> After remove CLOCK mode, CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode enum
>>>>>>>>>>> contains now
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> only
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> one value PRIMARY. Andrey Gura, proposition remove
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode enum. Will there be something
>>>>>>>>>>> special for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> purpose is enum?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jira: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4587
>>>> <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4587>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Best Regards,
>>>> Max K.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>
> --
> Best Regards,
> Max K.
>
>
>
>

--
Best Regards,
Max K.

[agura]

Maxim,

all GridClockSyncProcessor related code should be remove (objects,
messages, etc)

On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 12:23 PM, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Andrey, or better remove GridTimeSyncProcessorSelfTest class?
>
>> 7 марта 2017 г., в 12:21, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]> написал(а):
>>
>> Andrey, in GridTimeSyncProcessorSelfTest class methods: testTimeSync() and testTimeSyncChangeCoordinator() also removed?
>>
>>
>>> 6 марта 2017 г., в 18:42, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]> написал(а):
>>>
>>> Maxim,
>>>
>>> About SER_VER_COMPARATOR. You can use code branch that executes when
>>> times are equal:
>>>
>>> int nodeOrder1 = ver1.nodeOrder();
>>> int nodeOrder2 = ver2.nodeOrder();
>>>
>>> if (nodeOrder1 == nodeOrder2) {
>>>   long order1 = ver1.order();
>>>   long order2 = ver2.order();
>>>
>>>   assert order1 != order2;
>>>
>>>   return order1 > order2 ? 1 : -1;
>>> }
>>> else
>>>   return nodeOrder1 > nodeOrder2 ? 1 : -1;
>>>
>>> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 6:32 PM, Alexey Goncharuk
>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>> Maxim,
>>>>
>>>> Global time comparison is only needed for CLOCK mode, so you should modify
>>>> the code as if ignoreTime is always true.
>>>>
>>>> 2017-03-06 18:13 GMT+03:00 Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>:
>>>>
>>>>> ok,
>>>>> in GridCacheAtomicVersionComparator class, method
>>>>> compare(GridCacheVersion one, GridCacheVersion other, boolean ignoreTime)
>>>>> if (globalTime == otherGlobalTime || ignoreTime) {  // => if (ignoreTime) {
>>>>> .....
>>>>> }
>>>>> else
>>>>>   return globalTime > otherGlobalTime ? 1 : -1;   // => return -1;
>>>>>
>>>>> and,
>>>>> GridCacheMvcc class,
>>>>> SER_VER_COMPARATOR is comparator by globalTime var. His remove and remove
>>>>> compareSerializableVersion?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> 6 марта 2017 г., в 16:51, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]> написал(а):
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> updateTime() method should be removed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 12:12 PM, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> In CacheEntryImplEx class use ver.globalTime() in
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> @Override public long updateTime() {
>>>>>>>  return ver.globalTime();
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Than is better to replace this variable?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 3 марта 2017 г., в 19:19, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I think the next implementation will be good enough:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() {
>>>>>>>> return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(nodeOrderDrId, topVer), order);
>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Serialization/deserialization of GridCacheVersion.globalTime field
>>>>>>>> should be removed.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 5:57 PM, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Alexey,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() {
>>>>>>>>> return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(nodeOrderDrId << 32, topVer << 32),
>>>>> order);
>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So you want to change or not?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> And
>>>>>>>>> - GridCacheVersion.writeTo(ByteBuffer buf, MessageWriter writer)
>>>>>>>>> - GridCacheVersion.readFrom(ByteBuffer buf, MessageReader reader)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> use globalTime variable, must be removed case 0: (in both methods) or
>>>>> replace globalTime?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 2 марта 2017 г., в 16:58, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Removing of asGridUuid() method can lead to much code changes but it
>>>>>>>>>> should be avoided on this step.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 4:56 PM, Alexey Goncharuk
>>>>>>>>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I see several usages of asGridUuid() method, so I would just remove
>>>>> global
>>>>>>>>>>> time and use nodeOrderDrId and topVer as different parts of high
>>>>> and low
>>>>>>>>>>> parts of the embedded UUID.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> --AG
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> 2017-03-02 12:39 GMT+03:00 Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> When removed parameter globalTime, in method:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() {
>>>>>>>>>>>> return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(((long)topVer << 32) |
>>>>> nodeOrderDrId,
>>>>>>>>>>>> globalTime), order);
>>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> globalTime parameter replaced by something or remove this method?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2 марта 2017 г., в 12:07, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>
>>>>>>>>>>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please review PR again.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 18:47, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]>
>>>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think that it is ok.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 6:34 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
>>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ok. What do you say for the rest?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 18:15, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]>
>>>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think that during renaming we should not lose "Atomic"
>>>>> prefix.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 5:16 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
>>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey, ok.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Also remove in the modules/platform/dotnet
>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode.cs?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rename classes:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.startGrids ->
>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.startGridsLocal (commit)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderWithStoreInvokeTest ->
>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheWithStoreInvokeTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderInvokeTest ->
>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheInvokeTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderNearEnabledStoreValueTest
>>>>> ->
>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheNearEnabledStoreValueTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderNearRemoveFailureTest ->
>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheNearRemoveFailureTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderRemoveFailureTest ->
>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheRemoveFailureTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderFailoverSelfTest ->
>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheFailoverSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheValueConsistencyAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderNearEnabledS
>>>>> elfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>> -> GridCacheValueConsistencyNearEnabledSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryAsyncFailoverAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>>>>> ->
>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryAsyncFailoverSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryFailoverAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>>>>> ->
>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryFailoverSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.testNoBackupsPrimaryWriteOrder
>>>>> ->
>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.testNoBackups
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.
>>>>> testWithBackupsPrimaryWriteOrder
>>>>>>>>>>>> -> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.testWithBackups
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Remove classes:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderStoreValueTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheReplicatedAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderMultiNodeFullApiSe
>>>>> lfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderMultiNodeFullApiSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderMultiNodeP2PDisabledFullApiS
>>>>> elfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWrityOrderOffHeapMultiNodeFullApiSelfT
>>>>> est
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderOffHeapFullApiSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderFullApiSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderReloadAllSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCachePutRetryAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheValueConsistencyAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderExpiryPolicyTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ok? :)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 2:04, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]>
>>>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No, it should be removed. If somebody use entry last update
>>>>> time
>>>>>>>>>>>> (e.g.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for conflict resolving) they should store this time as entry
>>>>> field.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 12:57 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Do we still need GridClockSyncProcessor?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 5:26 AM, Andrey Gura <
>>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, this setting doesn't make sense anymore. So we need
>>>>> remove
>>>>>>>>>>>> all
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> related methods.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Also there is component called GridClockSyncProcessor that
>>>>> also
>>>>>>>>>>>> should
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be removed. It will lead to removing globalTime field from
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheVersion class and some related methods.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 3:21 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
>>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Valentin,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then there is no need for setting CacheConfiguration.
>>>>>>>>>>>> atomicWriteOrderMode.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What do you think, remove it and and related methods?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 28 февр. 2017 г., в 2:49, Valentin Kulichenko <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email]> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Max,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In case we remove the CLOCK mode, I think we should
>>>>> remove the
>>>>>>>>>>>> enum
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> too, as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> well as configuration properties and other code using
>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>>>> enum. Having
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enum with one value doesn't make sense to me.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Val
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 5:09 AM, Kozlov Maxim <
>>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Igniters,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> After remove CLOCK mode, CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode enum
>>>>>>>>>>>> contains now
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> only
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> one value PRIMARY. Andrey Gura, proposition remove
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode enum. Will there be something
>>>>>>>>>>>> special for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> purpose is enum?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jira: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4587
>>>>> <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4587>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
>> --
>> Best Regards,
>> Max K.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> Best Regards,
> Max K.
>
>
>
>

[Kozlov Maxim]

Andrey, Alexey, please review
PR - https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521 <https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521>
tests - http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests_RunAll&branch_IgniteTests=pull%2F1521%2Fhead&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv <http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests_RunAll&branch_IgniteTests=pull/1521/head&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv>

> 7 марта 2017 г., в 14:15, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]> написал(а):
>
> Maxim,
>
> all GridClockSyncProcessor related code should be remove (objects,
> messages, etc)
>
> On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 12:23 PM, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Andrey, or better remove GridTimeSyncProcessorSelfTest class?
>>
>>> 7 марта 2017 г., в 12:21, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]> написал(а):
>>>
>>> Andrey, in GridTimeSyncProcessorSelfTest class methods: testTimeSync() and testTimeSyncChangeCoordinator() also removed?
>>>
>>>
>>>> 6 марта 2017 г., в 18:42, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]> написал(а):
>>>>
>>>> Maxim,
>>>>
>>>> About SER_VER_COMPARATOR. You can use code branch that executes when
>>>> times are equal:
>>>>
>>>> int nodeOrder1 = ver1.nodeOrder();
>>>> int nodeOrder2 = ver2.nodeOrder();
>>>>
>>>> if (nodeOrder1 == nodeOrder2) {
>>>>  long order1 = ver1.order();
>>>>  long order2 = ver2.order();
>>>>
>>>>  assert order1 != order2;
>>>>
>>>>  return order1 > order2 ? 1 : -1;
>>>> }
>>>> else
>>>>  return nodeOrder1 > nodeOrder2 ? 1 : -1;
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 6:32 PM, Alexey Goncharuk
>>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>
>>>>> Global time comparison is only needed for CLOCK mode, so you should modify
>>>>> the code as if ignoreTime is always true.
>>>>>
>>>>> 2017-03-06 18:13 GMT+03:00 Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>:
>>>>>
>>>>>> ok,
>>>>>> in GridCacheAtomicVersionComparator class, method
>>>>>> compare(GridCacheVersion one, GridCacheVersion other, boolean ignoreTime)
>>>>>> if (globalTime == otherGlobalTime || ignoreTime) {  // => if (ignoreTime) {
>>>>>> .....
>>>>>> }
>>>>>> else
>>>>>>  return globalTime > otherGlobalTime ? 1 : -1;   // => return -1;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> and,
>>>>>> GridCacheMvcc class,
>>>>>> SER_VER_COMPARATOR is comparator by globalTime var. His remove and remove
>>>>>> compareSerializableVersion?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 6 марта 2017 г., в 16:51, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]> написал(а):
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> updateTime() method should be removed.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 12:12 PM, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> In CacheEntryImplEx class use ver.globalTime() in
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> @Override public long updateTime() {
>>>>>>>> return ver.globalTime();
>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Than is better to replace this variable?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 3 марта 2017 г., в 19:19, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I think the next implementation will be good enough:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() {
>>>>>>>>> return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(nodeOrderDrId, topVer), order);
>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Serialization/deserialization of GridCacheVersion.globalTime field
>>>>>>>>> should be removed.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 5:57 PM, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Alexey,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() {
>>>>>>>>>> return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(nodeOrderDrId << 32, topVer << 32),
>>>>>> order);
>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> So you want to change or not?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> And
>>>>>>>>>> - GridCacheVersion.writeTo(ByteBuffer buf, MessageWriter writer)
>>>>>>>>>> - GridCacheVersion.readFrom(ByteBuffer buf, MessageReader reader)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> use globalTime variable, must be removed case 0: (in both methods) or
>>>>>> replace globalTime?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> 2 марта 2017 г., в 16:58, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Removing of asGridUuid() method can lead to much code changes but it
>>>>>>>>>>> should be avoided on this step.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 4:56 PM, Alexey Goncharuk
>>>>>>>>>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I see several usages of asGridUuid() method, so I would just remove
>>>>>> global
>>>>>>>>>>>> time and use nodeOrderDrId and topVer as different parts of high
>>>>>> and low
>>>>>>>>>>>> parts of the embedded UUID.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> --AG
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2017-03-02 12:39 GMT+03:00 Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> When removed parameter globalTime, in method:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() {
>>>>>>>>>>>>> return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(((long)topVer << 32) |
>>>>>> nodeOrderDrId,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> globalTime), order);
>>>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> globalTime parameter replaced by something or remove this method?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2 марта 2017 г., в 12:07, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please review PR again.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 18:47, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]>
>>>>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think that it is ok.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 6:34 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
>>>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ok. What do you say for the rest?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 18:15, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]>
>>>>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think that during renaming we should not lose "Atomic"
>>>>>> prefix.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 5:16 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
>>>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey, ok.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Also remove in the modules/platform/dotnet
>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode.cs?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rename classes:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.startGrids ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.startGridsLocal (commit)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderWithStoreInvokeTest ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheWithStoreInvokeTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderInvokeTest ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheInvokeTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderNearEnabledStoreValueTest
>>>>>> ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheNearEnabledStoreValueTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderNearRemoveFailureTest ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheNearRemoveFailureTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderRemoveFailureTest ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheRemoveFailureTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderFailoverSelfTest ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheFailoverSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheValueConsistencyAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderNearEnabledS
>>>>>> elfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>> -> GridCacheValueConsistencyNearEnabledSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryAsyncFailoverAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>>>>>> ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryAsyncFailoverSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryFailoverAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>>>>>> ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryFailoverSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.testNoBackupsPrimaryWriteOrder
>>>>>> ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.testNoBackups
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.
>>>>>> testWithBackupsPrimaryWriteOrder
>>>>>>>>>>>>> -> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.testWithBackups
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Remove classes:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderStoreValueTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheReplicatedAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderMultiNodeFullApiSe
>>>>>> lfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderMultiNodeFullApiSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderMultiNodeP2PDisabledFullApiS
>>>>>> elfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWrityOrderOffHeapMultiNodeFullApiSelfT
>>>>>> est
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderOffHeapFullApiSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderFullApiSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderReloadAllSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCachePutRetryAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheValueConsistencyAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderExpiryPolicyTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ok? :)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 2:04, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]>
>>>>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No, it should be removed. If somebody use entry last update
>>>>>> time
>>>>>>>>>>>>> (e.g.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for conflict resolving) they should store this time as entry
>>>>>> field.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 12:57 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Do we still need GridClockSyncProcessor?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 5:26 AM, Andrey Gura <
>>>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, this setting doesn't make sense anymore. So we need
>>>>>> remove
>>>>>>>>>>>>> all
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> related methods.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Also there is component called GridClockSyncProcessor that
>>>>>> also
>>>>>>>>>>>>> should
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be removed. It will lead to removing globalTime field from
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheVersion class and some related methods.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 3:21 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
>>>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Valentin,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then there is no need for setting CacheConfiguration.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> atomicWriteOrderMode.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What do you think, remove it and and related methods?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 28 февр. 2017 г., в 2:49, Valentin Kulichenko <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email]> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Max,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In case we remove the CLOCK mode, I think we should
>>>>>> remove the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> enum
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> too, as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> well as configuration properties and other code using
>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>>>>> enum. Having
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enum with one value doesn't make sense to me.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Val
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 5:09 AM, Kozlov Maxim <
>>>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Igniters,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> After remove CLOCK mode, CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode enum
>>>>>>>>>>>>> contains now
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> only
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> one value PRIMARY. Andrey Gura, proposition remove
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode enum. Will there be something
>>>>>>>>>>>>> special for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> purpose is enum?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jira: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4587
>>>>>> <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4587>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Best Regards,
>>> Max K.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Best Regards,
>> Max K.
>>
>>
>>
>>

--
Best Regards,
Max K.

[agura]

Maxim,

I'll take a look today.

10 марта 2017 г. 11:06 AM пользователь "Kozlov Maxim" <[hidden email]>
написал:

> Andrey, Alexey, please review
> PR - https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521 <
> https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521>
> tests - http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=
> IgniteTests_RunAll&branch_IgniteTests=pull%2F1521%
> 2Fhead&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv <http://ci.ignite.apache.org/
> viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests_RunAll&branch_
> IgniteTests=pull/1521/head&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv>
>
> > 7 марта 2017 г., в 14:15, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]> написал(а):
> >
> > Maxim,
> >
> > all GridClockSyncProcessor related code should be remove (objects,
> > messages, etc)
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 12:23 PM, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> >> Andrey, or better remove GridTimeSyncProcessorSelfTest class?
> >>
> >>> 7 марта 2017 г., в 12:21, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>
> написал(а):
> >>>
> >>> Andrey, in GridTimeSyncProcessorSelfTest class methods: testTimeSync()
> and testTimeSyncChangeCoordinator() also removed?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> 6 марта 2017 г., в 18:42, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]> написал(а):
> >>>>
> >>>> Maxim,
> >>>>
> >>>> About SER_VER_COMPARATOR. You can use code branch that executes when
> >>>> times are equal:
> >>>>
> >>>> int nodeOrder1 = ver1.nodeOrder();
> >>>> int nodeOrder2 = ver2.nodeOrder();
> >>>>
> >>>> if (nodeOrder1 == nodeOrder2) {
> >>>>  long order1 = ver1.order();
> >>>>  long order2 = ver2.order();
> >>>>
> >>>>  assert order1 != order2;
> >>>>
> >>>>  return order1 > order2 ? 1 : -1;
> >>>> }
> >>>> else
> >>>>  return nodeOrder1 > nodeOrder2 ? 1 : -1;
> >>>>
> >>>> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 6:32 PM, Alexey Goncharuk
> >>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>>>> Maxim,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Global time comparison is only needed for CLOCK mode, so you should
> modify
> >>>>> the code as if ignoreTime is always true.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 2017-03-06 18:13 GMT+03:00 Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> ok,
> >>>>>> in GridCacheAtomicVersionComparator class, method
> >>>>>> compare(GridCacheVersion one, GridCacheVersion other, boolean
> ignoreTime)
> >>>>>> if (globalTime == otherGlobalTime || ignoreTime) {  // => if
> (ignoreTime) {
> >>>>>> .....
> >>>>>> }
> >>>>>> else
> >>>>>>  return globalTime > otherGlobalTime ? 1 : -1;   // => return -1;
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> and,
> >>>>>> GridCacheMvcc class,
> >>>>>> SER_VER_COMPARATOR is comparator by globalTime var. His remove and
> remove
> >>>>>> compareSerializableVersion?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> 6 марта 2017 г., в 16:51, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]>
> написал(а):
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Maxim,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> updateTime() method should be removed.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 12:12 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
> [hidden email]>
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> In CacheEntryImplEx class use ver.globalTime() in
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> @Override public long updateTime() {
> >>>>>>>> return ver.globalTime();
> >>>>>>>> }
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Than is better to replace this variable?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> 3 марта 2017 г., в 19:19, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]>
> написал(а):
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Maxim,
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I think the next implementation will be good enough:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() {
> >>>>>>>>> return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(nodeOrderDrId, topVer), order);
> >>>>>>>>> }
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Serialization/deserialization of GridCacheVersion.globalTime
> field
> >>>>>>>>> should be removed.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 5:57 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
> [hidden email]>
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> Alexey,
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() {
> >>>>>>>>>> return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(nodeOrderDrId << 32, topVer <<
> 32),
> >>>>>> order);
> >>>>>>>>>> }
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> So you want to change or not?
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> And
> >>>>>>>>>> - GridCacheVersion.writeTo(ByteBuffer buf, MessageWriter
> writer)
> >>>>>>>>>> - GridCacheVersion.readFrom(ByteBuffer buf, MessageReader
> reader)
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> use globalTime variable, must be removed case 0: (in both
> methods) or
> >>>>>> replace globalTime?
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> 2 марта 2017 г., в 16:58, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]>
> написал(а):
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> +1
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Removing of asGridUuid() method can lead to much code changes
> but it
> >>>>>>>>>>> should be avoided on this step.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 4:56 PM, Alexey Goncharuk
> >>>>>>>>>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> I see several usages of asGridUuid() method, so I would just
> remove
> >>>>>> global
> >>>>>>>>>>>> time and use nodeOrderDrId and topVer as different parts of
> high
> >>>>>> and low
> >>>>>>>>>>>> parts of the embedded UUID.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> --AG
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> 2017-03-02 12:39 GMT+03:00 Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]
> >:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> When removed parameter globalTime, in method:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() {
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(((long)topVer << 32) |
> >>>>>> nodeOrderDrId,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> globalTime), order);
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> }
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> globalTime parameter replaced by something or remove this
> method?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2 марта 2017 г., в 12:07, Kozlov Maxim <
> [hidden email]>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> написал(а):
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please review PR again.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 18:47, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]>
> >>>>>> написал(а):
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think that it is ok.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 6:34 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
> >>>>>> [hidden email]>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ok. What do you say for the rest?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 18:15, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]>
> >>>>>> написал(а):
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think that during renaming we should not lose "Atomic"
> >>>>>> prefix.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 5:16 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
> >>>>>> [hidden email]>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey, ok.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Also remove in the modules/platform/dotnet
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode.cs?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rename classes:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.startGrids ->
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.startGridsLocal (commit)
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderWithStoreInvokeTest
> ->
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheWithStoreInvokeTest
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderInvokeTest ->
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheInvokeTest
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteO
> rderNearEnabledStoreValueTest
> >>>>>> ->
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheNearEnabledStoreValueTest
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderNearRemoveFailureTest
> ->
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheNearRemoveFailureTest
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderRemoveFailureTest ->
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheRemoveFailureTest
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderFailoverSelfTest ->
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheFailoverSelfTest
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheValueConsistencyAtomi
> cPrimaryWriteOrderNearEnabledS
> >>>>>> elfTest
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -> GridCacheValueConsistencyNearEnabledSelfTest
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryAsyncFailo
> verAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
> >>>>>> ->
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryAsyncFailoverSelfTest
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryFailoverAt
> omicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
> >>>>>> ->
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryFailoverSelfTest
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.
> testNoBackupsPrimaryWriteOrder
> >>>>>> ->
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.testNoBackups
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.
> >>>>>> testWithBackupsPrimaryWriteOrder
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.testWithBackups
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Remove classes:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderStoreValueTest
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheReplicatedAtomicPrima
> ryWriteOrderMultiNodeFullApiSe
> >>>>>> lfTest
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrd
> erMultiNodeFullApiSelfTest
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrd
> erMultiNodeP2PDisabledFullApiS
> >>>>>> elfTest
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWrityOrd
> erOffHeapMultiNodeFullApiSelfT
> >>>>>> est
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderOffHeapFullApiSelfTest
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderFullApiSelfTest
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderReloadAllSelfTest
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCachePutRetryAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheValueConsistencyAtomi
> cPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderExpiryPolicyTest
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ok? :)
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 2:04, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]
> >
> >>>>>> написал(а):
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No, it should be removed. If somebody use entry last
> update
> >>>>>> time
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> (e.g.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for conflict resolving) they should store this time as
> entry
> >>>>>> field.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 12:57 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Do we still need GridClockSyncProcessor?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 5:26 AM, Andrey Gura <
> >>>>>> [hidden email]>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, this setting doesn't make sense anymore. So we
> need
> >>>>>> remove
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> all
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> related methods.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Also there is component called
> GridClockSyncProcessor that
> >>>>>> also
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> should
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be removed. It will lead to removing globalTime
> field from
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheVersion class and some related methods.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 3:21 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email]>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Valentin,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then there is no need for setting
> CacheConfiguration.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> atomicWriteOrderMode.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What do you think, remove it and and related methods?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 28 февр. 2017 г., в 2:49, Valentin Kulichenko <
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email]> написал(а):
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Max,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In case we remove the CLOCK mode, I think we should
> >>>>>> remove the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> enum
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> too, as
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> well as configuration properties and other code
> using
> >>>>>> this
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> enum. Having
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enum with one value doesn't make sense to me.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Val
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 5:09 AM, Kozlov Maxim <
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email]>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Igniters,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> After remove CLOCK mode,
> CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode enum
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> contains now
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> only
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> one value PRIMARY. Andrey Gura, proposition remove
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode enum. Will there be
> something
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> special for
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> purpose is enum?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jira: https://issues.apache.org/
> jira/browse/IGNITE-4587
> >>>>>> <
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4587
> >
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
> >>>>>>>>>> Max K.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>> Best Regards,
> >>>>>>>> Max K.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> --
> >>>>>> Best Regards,
> >>>>>> Max K.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Best Regards,
> >>> Max K.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Best Regards,
> >> Max K.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
> --
> Best Regards,
> Max K.
>
>
>
>
>

[Alexey Kuznetsov]

I will also take a  look for Web Console changes tomorrow.

On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 5:00 PM, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Maxim,
>
> I'll take a look today.
>
> 10 марта 2017 г. 11:06 AM пользователь "Kozlov Maxim" <
> [hidden email]>
> написал:
>
> > Andrey, Alexey, please review
> > PR - https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521 <
> > https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521>
> > tests - http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=
> > IgniteTests_RunAll&branch_IgniteTests=pull%2F1521%
> > 2Fhead&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv <http://ci.ignite.apache.org/
> > viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests_RunAll&branch_
> > IgniteTests=pull/1521/head&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv>
> >
> > > 7 марта 2017 г., в 14:15, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]> написал(а):
> > >
> > > Maxim,
> > >
> > > all GridClockSyncProcessor related code should be remove (objects,
> > > messages, etc)
> > >
> > > On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 12:23 PM, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> > >> Andrey, or better remove GridTimeSyncProcessorSelfTest class?
> > >>
> > >>> 7 марта 2017 г., в 12:21, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>
> > написал(а):
> > >>>
> > >>> Andrey, in GridTimeSyncProcessorSelfTest class methods:
> testTimeSync()
> > and testTimeSyncChangeCoordinator() also removed?
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>> 6 марта 2017 г., в 18:42, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]>
> написал(а):
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Maxim,
> > >>>>
> > >>>> About SER_VER_COMPARATOR. You can use code branch that executes when
> > >>>> times are equal:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> int nodeOrder1 = ver1.nodeOrder();
> > >>>> int nodeOrder2 = ver2.nodeOrder();
> > >>>>
> > >>>> if (nodeOrder1 == nodeOrder2) {
> > >>>>  long order1 = ver1.order();
> > >>>>  long order2 = ver2.order();
> > >>>>
> > >>>>  assert order1 != order2;
> > >>>>
> > >>>>  return order1 > order2 ? 1 : -1;
> > >>>> }
> > >>>> else
> > >>>>  return nodeOrder1 > nodeOrder2 ? 1 : -1;
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 6:32 PM, Alexey Goncharuk
> > >>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >>>>> Maxim,
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Global time comparison is only needed for CLOCK mode, so you should
> > modify
> > >>>>> the code as if ignoreTime is always true.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> 2017-03-06 18:13 GMT+03:00 Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> ok,
> > >>>>>> in GridCacheAtomicVersionComparator class, method
> > >>>>>> compare(GridCacheVersion one, GridCacheVersion other, boolean
> > ignoreTime)
> > >>>>>> if (globalTime == otherGlobalTime || ignoreTime) {  // => if
> > (ignoreTime) {
> > >>>>>> .....
> > >>>>>> }
> > >>>>>> else
> > >>>>>>  return globalTime > otherGlobalTime ? 1 : -1;   // => return -1;
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> and,
> > >>>>>> GridCacheMvcc class,
> > >>>>>> SER_VER_COMPARATOR is comparator by globalTime var. His remove and
> > remove
> > >>>>>> compareSerializableVersion?
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> 6 марта 2017 г., в 16:51, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]>
> > написал(а):
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Maxim,
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> updateTime() method should be removed.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 12:12 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
> > [hidden email]>
> > >>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>> In CacheEntryImplEx class use ver.globalTime() in
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> @Override public long updateTime() {
> > >>>>>>>> return ver.globalTime();
> > >>>>>>>> }
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Than is better to replace this variable?
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> 3 марта 2017 г., в 19:19, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]>
> > написал(а):
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> Maxim,
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> I think the next implementation will be good enough:
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() {
> > >>>>>>>>> return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(nodeOrderDrId, topVer), order);
> > >>>>>>>>> }
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> Serialization/deserialization of GridCacheVersion.globalTime
> > field
> > >>>>>>>>> should be removed.
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 5:57 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
> > [hidden email]>
> > >>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>> Alexey,
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() {
> > >>>>>>>>>> return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(nodeOrderDrId << 32, topVer <<
> > 32),
> > >>>>>> order);
> > >>>>>>>>>> }
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> So you want to change or not?
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> And
> > >>>>>>>>>> - GridCacheVersion.writeTo(ByteBuffer buf, MessageWriter
> > writer)
> > >>>>>>>>>> - GridCacheVersion.readFrom(ByteBuffer buf, MessageReader
> > reader)
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> use globalTime variable, must be removed case 0: (in both
> > methods) or
> > >>>>>> replace globalTime?
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>> 2 марта 2017 г., в 16:58, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]>
> > написал(а):
> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>> +1
> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>> Removing of asGridUuid() method can lead to much code changes
> > but it
> > >>>>>>>>>>> should be avoided on this step.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 4:56 PM, Alexey Goncharuk
> > >>>>>>>>>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> I see several usages of asGridUuid() method, so I would just
> > remove
> > >>>>>> global
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> time and use nodeOrderDrId and topVer as different parts of
> > high
> > >>>>>> and low
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> parts of the embedded UUID.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> --AG
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> 2017-03-02 12:39 GMT+03:00 Kozlov Maxim <
> [hidden email]
> > >:
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey,
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> When removed parameter globalTime, in method:
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() {
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(((long)topVer << 32) |
> > >>>>>> nodeOrderDrId,
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> globalTime), order);
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> }
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> globalTime parameter replaced by something or remove this
> > method?
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2 марта 2017 г., в 12:07, Kozlov Maxim <
> > [hidden email]>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> написал(а):
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey,
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please review PR again.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 18:47, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]>
> > >>>>>> написал(а):
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think that it is ok.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 6:34 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
> > >>>>>> [hidden email]>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ok. What do you say for the rest?
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 18:15, Andrey Gura <
> [hidden email]>
> > >>>>>> написал(а):
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think that during renaming we should not lose
> "Atomic"
> > >>>>>> prefix.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 5:16 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
> > >>>>>> [hidden email]>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey, ok.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Also remove in the modules/platform/dotnet
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode.cs?
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rename classes:
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.startGrids ->
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.startGridsLocal (commit)
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderWithStoreInvokeTest
> > ->
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheWithStoreInvokeTest
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderInvokeTest ->
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheInvokeTest
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteO
> > rderNearEnabledStoreValueTest
> > >>>>>> ->
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheNearEnabledStoreValueTest
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderNearRemoveFailureTest
> > ->
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheNearRemoveFailureTest
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderRemoveFailureTest ->
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheRemoveFailureTest
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderFailoverSelfTest ->
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheFailoverSelfTest
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheValueConsistencyAtomi
> > cPrimaryWriteOrderNearEnabledS
> > >>>>>> elfTest
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> -> GridCacheValueConsistencyNearEnabledSelfTest
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryAsyncFailo
> > verAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
> > >>>>>> ->
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryAsyncFailoverSelfTest
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryFailoverAt
> > omicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
> > >>>>>> ->
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryFailoverSelfTest
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.
> > testNoBackupsPrimaryWriteOrder
> > >>>>>> ->
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.testNoBackups
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.
> > >>>>>> testWithBackupsPrimaryWriteOrder
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> -> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.testWithBackups
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Remove classes:
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderStoreValueTest
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheReplicatedAtomicPrima
> > ryWriteOrderMultiNodeFullApiSe
> > >>>>>> lfTest
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrd
> > erMultiNodeFullApiSelfTest
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrd
> > erMultiNodeP2PDisabledFullApiS
> > >>>>>> elfTest
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWrityOrd
> > erOffHeapMultiNodeFullApiSelfT
> > >>>>>> est
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrd
> erOffHeapFullApiSelfTest
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderFullApiSelfTest
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderReloadAllSelfTest
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCachePutRetryAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheValueConsistencyAtomi
> > cPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderExpiryPolicyTest
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ok? :)
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 2:04, Andrey Gura <
> [hidden email]
> > >
> > >>>>>> написал(а):
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No, it should be removed. If somebody use entry last
> > update
> > >>>>>> time
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> (e.g.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for conflict resolving) they should store this time
> as
> > entry
> > >>>>>> field.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 12:57 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Do we still need GridClockSyncProcessor?
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 5:26 AM, Andrey Gura <
> > >>>>>> [hidden email]>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, this setting doesn't make sense anymore. So we
> > need
> > >>>>>> remove
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> all
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> related methods.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Also there is component called
> > GridClockSyncProcessor that
> > >>>>>> also
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> should
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be removed. It will lead to removing globalTime
> > field from
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheVersion class and some related methods.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 3:21 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email]>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Valentin,
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then there is no need for setting
> > CacheConfiguration.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> atomicWriteOrderMode.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What do you think, remove it and and related
> methods?
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 28 февр. 2017 г., в 2:49, Valentin Kulichenko <
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email]> написал(а):
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Max,
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In case we remove the CLOCK mode, I think we
> should
> > >>>>>> remove the
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> enum
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> too, as
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> well as configuration properties and other code
> > using
> > >>>>>> this
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> enum. Having
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enum with one value doesn't make sense to me.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Val
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 5:09 AM, Kozlov Maxim <
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email]>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Igniters,
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> After remove CLOCK mode,
> > CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode enum
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> contains now
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> only
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> one value PRIMARY. Andrey Gura, proposition
> remove
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode enum. Will there be
> > something
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> special for
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> purpose is enum?
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jira: https://issues.apache.org/
> > jira/browse/IGNITE-4587
> > >>>>>> <
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/
> jira/browse/IGNITE-4587
> > >
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> --
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> --
> > >>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
> > >>>>>>>>>> Max K.
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> --
> > >>>>>>>> Best Regards,
> > >>>>>>>> Max K.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> --
> > >>>>>> Best Regards,
> > >>>>>> Max K.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>
> > >>> --
> > >>> Best Regards,
> > >>> Max K.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> Best Regards,
> > >> Max K.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> > --
> > Best Regards,
> > Max K.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>

--
Alexey Kuznetsov

[Igor Sapego]

I took a look at .NET and C++ parts. Looks good to me.

Best Regards,
Igor

On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 2:35 PM, Alexey Kuznetsov <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> I will also take a  look for Web Console changes tomorrow.
>
> On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 5:00 PM, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Maxim,
> >
> > I'll take a look today.
> >
> > 10 марта 2017 г. 11:06 AM пользователь "Kozlov Maxim" <
> > [hidden email]>
> > написал:
> >
> > > Andrey, Alexey, please review
> > > PR - https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521 <
> > > https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521>
> > > tests - http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=
> > > IgniteTests_RunAll&branch_IgniteTests=pull%2F1521%
> > > 2Fhead&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv <http://ci.ignite.apache.org/
> > > viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests_RunAll&branch_
> > > IgniteTests=pull/1521/head&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv>
> > >
> > > > 7 марта 2017 г., в 14:15, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]> написал(а):
> > > >
> > > > Maxim,
> > > >
> > > > all GridClockSyncProcessor related code should be remove (objects,
> > > > messages, etc)
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 12:23 PM, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>
> > > wrote:
> > > >> Andrey, or better remove GridTimeSyncProcessorSelfTest class?
> > > >>
> > > >>> 7 марта 2017 г., в 12:21, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>
> > > написал(а):
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Andrey, in GridTimeSyncProcessorSelfTest class methods:
> > testTimeSync()
> > > and testTimeSyncChangeCoordinator() also removed?
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>> 6 марта 2017 г., в 18:42, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]>
> > написал(а):
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Maxim,
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> About SER_VER_COMPARATOR. You can use code branch that executes
> when
> > > >>>> times are equal:
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> int nodeOrder1 = ver1.nodeOrder();
> > > >>>> int nodeOrder2 = ver2.nodeOrder();
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> if (nodeOrder1 == nodeOrder2) {
> > > >>>>  long order1 = ver1.order();
> > > >>>>  long order2 = ver2.order();
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>  assert order1 != order2;
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>  return order1 > order2 ? 1 : -1;
> > > >>>> }
> > > >>>> else
> > > >>>>  return nodeOrder1 > nodeOrder2 ? 1 : -1;
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 6:32 PM, Alexey Goncharuk
> > > >>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > >>>>> Maxim,
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Global time comparison is only needed for CLOCK mode, so you
> should
> > > modify
> > > >>>>> the code as if ignoreTime is always true.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> 2017-03-06 18:13 GMT+03:00 Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>:
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>> ok,
> > > >>>>>> in GridCacheAtomicVersionComparator class, method
> > > >>>>>> compare(GridCacheVersion one, GridCacheVersion other, boolean
> > > ignoreTime)
> > > >>>>>> if (globalTime == otherGlobalTime || ignoreTime) {  // => if
> > > (ignoreTime) {
> > > >>>>>> .....
> > > >>>>>> }
> > > >>>>>> else
> > > >>>>>>  return globalTime > otherGlobalTime ? 1 : -1;   // => return
> -1;
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> and,
> > > >>>>>> GridCacheMvcc class,
> > > >>>>>> SER_VER_COMPARATOR is comparator by globalTime var. His remove
> and
> > > remove
> > > >>>>>> compareSerializableVersion?
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> 6 марта 2017 г., в 16:51, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]>
> > > написал(а):
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> Maxim,
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> updateTime() method should be removed.
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 12:12 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
> > > [hidden email]>
> > > >>>>>> wrote:
> > > >>>>>>>> In CacheEntryImplEx class use ver.globalTime() in
> > > >>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>> @Override public long updateTime() {
> > > >>>>>>>> return ver.globalTime();
> > > >>>>>>>> }
> > > >>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>> Than is better to replace this variable?
> > > >>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>> 3 марта 2017 г., в 19:19, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]>
> > > написал(а):
> > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>> Maxim,
> > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>> I think the next implementation will be good enough:
> > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() {
> > > >>>>>>>>> return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(nodeOrderDrId, topVer),
> order);
> > > >>>>>>>>> }
> > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>> Serialization/deserialization of GridCacheVersion.globalTime
> > > field
> > > >>>>>>>>> should be removed.
> > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 5:57 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
> > > [hidden email]>
> > > >>>>>> wrote:
> > > >>>>>>>>>> Alexey,
> > > >>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() {
> > > >>>>>>>>>> return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(nodeOrderDrId << 32, topVer
> <<
> > > 32),
> > > >>>>>> order);
> > > >>>>>>>>>> }
> > > >>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>> So you want to change or not?
> > > >>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>> And
> > > >>>>>>>>>> - GridCacheVersion.writeTo(ByteBuffer buf, MessageWriter
> > > writer)
> > > >>>>>>>>>> - GridCacheVersion.readFrom(ByteBuffer buf, MessageReader
> > > reader)
> > > >>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>> use globalTime variable, must be removed case 0: (in both
> > > methods) or
> > > >>>>>> replace globalTime?
> > > >>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>> 2 марта 2017 г., в 16:58, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]>
> > > написал(а):
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>> +1
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Removing of asGridUuid() method can lead to much code
> changes
> > > but it
> > > >>>>>>>>>>> should be avoided on this step.
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 4:56 PM, Alexey Goncharuk
> > > >>>>>>>>>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> I see several usages of asGridUuid() method, so I would
> just
> > > remove
> > > >>>>>> global
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> time and use nodeOrderDrId and topVer as different parts
> of
> > > high
> > > >>>>>> and low
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> parts of the embedded UUID.
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> --AG
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> 2017-03-02 12:39 GMT+03:00 Kozlov Maxim <
> > [hidden email]
> > > >:
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey,
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> When removed parameter globalTime, in method:
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() {
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(((long)topVer << 32) |
> > > >>>>>> nodeOrderDrId,
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> globalTime), order);
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> }
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> globalTime parameter replaced by something or remove this
> > > method?
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2 марта 2017 г., в 12:07, Kozlov Maxim <
> > > [hidden email]>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> написал(а):
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey,
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please review PR again.
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 18:47, Andrey Gura <
> [hidden email]>
> > > >>>>>> написал(а):
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think that it is ok.
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 6:34 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
> > > >>>>>> [hidden email]>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ok. What do you say for the rest?
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 18:15, Andrey Gura <
> > [hidden email]>
> > > >>>>>> написал(а):
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think that during renaming we should not lose
> > "Atomic"
> > > >>>>>> prefix.
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 5:16 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
> > > >>>>>> [hidden email]>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey, ok.
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Also remove in the modules/platform/dotnet
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode.cs?
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rename classes:
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.startGrids ->
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.startGridsLocal
> (commit)
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteO
> rderWithStoreInvokeTest
> > > ->
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheWithStoreInvokeTest
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderInvokeTest ->
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheInvokeTest
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteO
> > > rderNearEnabledStoreValueTest
> > > >>>>>> ->
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheNearEnabledStoreValueTest
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrd
> erNearRemoveFailureTest
> > > ->
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheNearRemoveFailureTest
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderRemoveFailureTest
> ->
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheRemoveFailureTest
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderFailoverSelfTest ->
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheFailoverSelfTest
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheValueConsistencyAtomi
> > > cPrimaryWriteOrderNearEnabledS
> > > >>>>>> elfTest
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> -> GridCacheValueConsistencyNearEnabledSelfTest
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryAsyncFailo
> > > verAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
> > > >>>>>> ->
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryAsyncFailoverSelfTest
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryFailoverAt
> > > omicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
> > > >>>>>> ->
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryFailoverSelfTest
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.
> > > testNoBackupsPrimaryWriteOrder
> > > >>>>>> ->
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.testNoBackups
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.
> > > >>>>>> testWithBackupsPrimaryWriteOrder
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> -> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.testWithBackups
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Remove classes:
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderStoreValueTest
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheReplicatedAtomicPrima
> > > ryWriteOrderMultiNodeFullApiSe
> > > >>>>>> lfTest
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrd
> > > erMultiNodeFullApiSelfTest
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrd
> > > erMultiNodeP2PDisabledFullApiS
> > > >>>>>> elfTest
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWrityOrd
> > > erOffHeapMultiNodeFullApiSelfT
> > > >>>>>> est
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrd
> > erOffHeapFullApiSelfTest
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderFullApiSelfTest
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderReloadAllSelfTest
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCachePutRetryAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheValueConsistencyAtomi
> > > cPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderExpiryPolicyTest
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ok? :)
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 2:04, Andrey Gura <
> > [hidden email]
> > > >
> > > >>>>>> написал(а):
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No, it should be removed. If somebody use entry
> last
> > > update
> > > >>>>>> time
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> (e.g.
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for conflict resolving) they should store this time
> > as
> > > entry
> > > >>>>>> field.
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 12:57 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Do we still need GridClockSyncProcessor?
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 5:26 AM, Andrey Gura <
> > > >>>>>> [hidden email]>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, this setting doesn't make sense anymore. So
> we
> > > need
> > > >>>>>> remove
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> all
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> related methods.
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Also there is component called
> > > GridClockSyncProcessor that
> > > >>>>>> also
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> should
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be removed. It will lead to removing globalTime
> > > field from
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheVersion class and some related methods.
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 3:21 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email]>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Valentin,
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then there is no need for setting
> > > CacheConfiguration.
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> atomicWriteOrderMode.
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What do you think, remove it and and related
> > methods?
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 28 февр. 2017 г., в 2:49, Valentin Kulichenko <
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email]> написал(а):
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Max,
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In case we remove the CLOCK mode, I think we
> > should
> > > >>>>>> remove the
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> enum
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> too, as
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> well as configuration properties and other code
> > > using
> > > >>>>>> this
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> enum. Having
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enum with one value doesn't make sense to me.
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Val
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 5:09 AM, Kozlov Maxim <
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email]>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Igniters,
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> After remove CLOCK mode,
> > > CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode enum
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> contains now
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> only
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> one value PRIMARY. Andrey Gura, proposition
> > remove
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode enum. Will there be
> > > something
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> special for
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> purpose is enum?
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jira: https://issues.apache.org/
> > > jira/browse/IGNITE-4587
> > > >>>>>> <
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/
> > jira/browse/IGNITE-4587
> > > >
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> --
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>> --
> > > >>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
> > > >>>>>>>>>> Max K.
> > > >>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>> --
> > > >>>>>>>> Best Regards,
> > > >>>>>>>> Max K.
> > > >>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> --
> > > >>>>>> Best Regards,
> > > >>>>>> Max K.
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> --
> > > >>> Best Regards,
> > > >>> Max K.
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > > >> --
> > > >> Best Regards,
> > > >> Max K.
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
> > > --
> > > Best Regards,
> > > Max K.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Alexey Kuznetsov
>

[dmagda]

Maxim,

Please update Apache Ignite 2.0 migration guide:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.0+Migration+Guide <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.0+Migration+Guide>

You need to say that the parameter has been discontinued and the users can use CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode.PRIMARY instead.

Agreed?

—
Denis

> On Mar 10, 2017, at 12:06 AM, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Andrey, Alexey, please review
> PR - https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521 <https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521>
> tests - http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests_RunAll&branch_IgniteTests=pull%2F1521%2Fhead&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv <http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests_RunAll&branch_IgniteTests=pull/1521/head&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv>
>
>> 7 марта 2017 г., в 14:15, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]> написал(а):
>>
>> Maxim,
>>
>> all GridClockSyncProcessor related code should be remove (objects,
>> messages, etc)
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 12:23 PM, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> Andrey, or better remove GridTimeSyncProcessorSelfTest class?
>>>
>>>> 7 марта 2017 г., в 12:21, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]> написал(а):
>>>>
>>>> Andrey, in GridTimeSyncProcessorSelfTest class methods: testTimeSync() and testTimeSyncChangeCoordinator() also removed?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> 6 марта 2017 г., в 18:42, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]> написал(а):
>>>>>
>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>
>>>>> About SER_VER_COMPARATOR. You can use code branch that executes when
>>>>> times are equal:
>>>>>
>>>>> int nodeOrder1 = ver1.nodeOrder();
>>>>> int nodeOrder2 = ver2.nodeOrder();
>>>>>
>>>>> if (nodeOrder1 == nodeOrder2) {
>>>>> long order1 = ver1.order();
>>>>> long order2 = ver2.order();
>>>>>
>>>>> assert order1 != order2;
>>>>>
>>>>> return order1 > order2 ? 1 : -1;
>>>>> }
>>>>> else
>>>>> return nodeOrder1 > nodeOrder2 ? 1 : -1;
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 6:32 PM, Alexey Goncharuk
>>>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Global time comparison is only needed for CLOCK mode, so you should modify
>>>>>> the code as if ignoreTime is always true.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2017-03-06 18:13 GMT+03:00 Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ok,
>>>>>>> in GridCacheAtomicVersionComparator class, method
>>>>>>> compare(GridCacheVersion one, GridCacheVersion other, boolean ignoreTime)
>>>>>>> if (globalTime == otherGlobalTime || ignoreTime) {  // => if (ignoreTime) {
>>>>>>> .....
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>> else
>>>>>>> return globalTime > otherGlobalTime ? 1 : -1;   // => return -1;
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> and,
>>>>>>> GridCacheMvcc class,
>>>>>>> SER_VER_COMPARATOR is comparator by globalTime var. His remove and remove
>>>>>>> compareSerializableVersion?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 6 марта 2017 г., в 16:51, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> updateTime() method should be removed.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 12:12 PM, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> In CacheEntryImplEx class use ver.globalTime() in
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> @Override public long updateTime() {
>>>>>>>>> return ver.globalTime();
>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Than is better to replace this variable?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 3 марта 2017 г., в 19:19, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I think the next implementation will be good enough:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() {
>>>>>>>>>> return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(nodeOrderDrId, topVer), order);
>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Serialization/deserialization of GridCacheVersion.globalTime field
>>>>>>>>>> should be removed.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 5:57 PM, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Alexey,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() {
>>>>>>>>>>> return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(nodeOrderDrId << 32, topVer << 32),
>>>>>>> order);
>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> So you want to change or not?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> And
>>>>>>>>>>> - GridCacheVersion.writeTo(ByteBuffer buf, MessageWriter writer)
>>>>>>>>>>> - GridCacheVersion.readFrom(ByteBuffer buf, MessageReader reader)
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> use globalTime variable, must be removed case 0: (in both methods) or
>>>>>>> replace globalTime?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2 марта 2017 г., в 16:58, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Removing of asGridUuid() method can lead to much code changes but it
>>>>>>>>>>>> should be avoided on this step.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 4:56 PM, Alexey Goncharuk
>>>>>>>>>>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I see several usages of asGridUuid() method, so I would just remove
>>>>>>> global
>>>>>>>>>>>>> time and use nodeOrderDrId and topVer as different parts of high
>>>>>>> and low
>>>>>>>>>>>>> parts of the embedded UUID.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> --AG
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2017-03-02 12:39 GMT+03:00 Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> When removed parameter globalTime, in method:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() {
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(((long)topVer << 32) |
>>>>>>> nodeOrderDrId,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> globalTime), order);
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> globalTime parameter replaced by something or remove this method?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2 марта 2017 г., в 12:07, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please review PR again.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 18:47, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]>
>>>>>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think that it is ok.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 6:34 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
>>>>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ok. What do you say for the rest?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 18:15, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]>
>>>>>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think that during renaming we should not lose "Atomic"
>>>>>>> prefix.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 5:16 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
>>>>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey, ok.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Also remove in the modules/platform/dotnet
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode.cs?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rename classes:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.startGrids ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.startGridsLocal (commit)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderWithStoreInvokeTest ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheWithStoreInvokeTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderInvokeTest ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheInvokeTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderNearEnabledStoreValueTest
>>>>>>> ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheNearEnabledStoreValueTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderNearRemoveFailureTest ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheNearRemoveFailureTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderRemoveFailureTest ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheRemoveFailureTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderFailoverSelfTest ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheFailoverSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheValueConsistencyAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderNearEnabledS
>>>>>>> elfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -> GridCacheValueConsistencyNearEnabledSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryAsyncFailoverAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>>>>>>> ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryAsyncFailoverSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryFailoverAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>>>>>>> ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryFailoverSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.testNoBackupsPrimaryWriteOrder
>>>>>>> ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.testNoBackups
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.
>>>>>>> testWithBackupsPrimaryWriteOrder
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.testWithBackups
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Remove classes:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderStoreValueTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheReplicatedAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderMultiNodeFullApiSe
>>>>>>> lfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderMultiNodeFullApiSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderMultiNodeP2PDisabledFullApiS
>>>>>>> elfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWrityOrderOffHeapMultiNodeFullApiSelfT
>>>>>>> est
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderOffHeapFullApiSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderFullApiSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderReloadAllSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCachePutRetryAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheValueConsistencyAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderExpiryPolicyTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ok? :)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 2:04, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]>
>>>>>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No, it should be removed. If somebody use entry last update
>>>>>>> time
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (e.g.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for conflict resolving) they should store this time as entry
>>>>>>> field.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 12:57 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Do we still need GridClockSyncProcessor?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 5:26 AM, Andrey Gura <
>>>>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, this setting doesn't make sense anymore. So we need
>>>>>>> remove
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> related methods.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Also there is component called GridClockSyncProcessor that
>>>>>>> also
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be removed. It will lead to removing globalTime field from
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheVersion class and some related methods.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 3:21 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Valentin,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then there is no need for setting CacheConfiguration.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> atomicWriteOrderMode.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What do you think, remove it and and related methods?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 28 февр. 2017 г., в 2:49, Valentin Kulichenko <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email]> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Max,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In case we remove the CLOCK mode, I think we should
>>>>>>> remove the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enum
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> too, as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> well as configuration properties and other code using
>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enum. Having
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enum with one value doesn't make sense to me.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Val
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 5:09 AM, Kozlov Maxim <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Igniters,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> After remove CLOCK mode, CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode enum
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contains now
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> only
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> one value PRIMARY. Andrey Gura, proposition remove
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode enum. Will there be something
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> special for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> purpose is enum?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jira: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4587
>>>>>>> <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4587>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Best Regards,
>>>> Max K.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Best Regards,
>>> Max K.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
> --
> Best Regards,
> Max K.
>
>
>
>

[Kozlov Maxim]

Denis,

ok

> 13 марта 2017 г., в 18:59, Denis Magda <[hidden email]> написал(а):
>
> Maxim,
>
> Please update Apache Ignite 2.0 migration guide:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.0+Migration+Guide <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.0+Migration+Guide>
>
> You need to say that the parameter has been discontinued and the users can use CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode.PRIMARY instead.
>
> Agreed?
>
> —
> Denis
>
>> On Mar 10, 2017, at 12:06 AM, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Andrey, Alexey, please review
>> PR - https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521 <https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521>
>> tests - http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests_RunAll&branch_IgniteTests=pull%2F1521%2Fhead&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv <http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests_RunAll&branch_IgniteTests=pull/1521/head&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv>
>>
>>> 7 марта 2017 г., в 14:15, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]> написал(а):
>>>
>>> Maxim,
>>>
>>> all GridClockSyncProcessor related code should be remove (objects,
>>> messages, etc)
>>>
>>> On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 12:23 PM, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>> Andrey, or better remove GridTimeSyncProcessorSelfTest class?
>>>>
>>>>> 7 марта 2017 г., в 12:21, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]> написал(а):
>>>>>
>>>>> Andrey, in GridTimeSyncProcessorSelfTest class methods: testTimeSync() and testTimeSyncChangeCoordinator() also removed?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> 6 марта 2017 г., в 18:42, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]> написал(а):
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> About SER_VER_COMPARATOR. You can use code branch that executes when
>>>>>> times are equal:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> int nodeOrder1 = ver1.nodeOrder();
>>>>>> int nodeOrder2 = ver2.nodeOrder();
>>>>>>
>>>>>> if (nodeOrder1 == nodeOrder2) {
>>>>>> long order1 = ver1.order();
>>>>>> long order2 = ver2.order();
>>>>>>
>>>>>> assert order1 != order2;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> return order1 > order2 ? 1 : -1;
>>>>>> }
>>>>>> else
>>>>>> return nodeOrder1 > nodeOrder2 ? 1 : -1;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 6:32 PM, Alexey Goncharuk
>>>>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Global time comparison is only needed for CLOCK mode, so you should modify
>>>>>>> the code as if ignoreTime is always true.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2017-03-06 18:13 GMT+03:00 Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ok,
>>>>>>>> in GridCacheAtomicVersionComparator class, method
>>>>>>>> compare(GridCacheVersion one, GridCacheVersion other, boolean ignoreTime)
>>>>>>>> if (globalTime == otherGlobalTime || ignoreTime) {  // => if (ignoreTime) {
>>>>>>>> .....
>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>> else
>>>>>>>> return globalTime > otherGlobalTime ? 1 : -1;   // => return -1;
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> and,
>>>>>>>> GridCacheMvcc class,
>>>>>>>> SER_VER_COMPARATOR is comparator by globalTime var. His remove and remove
>>>>>>>> compareSerializableVersion?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 6 марта 2017 г., в 16:51, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> updateTime() method should be removed.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 12:12 PM, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> In CacheEntryImplEx class use ver.globalTime() in
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> @Override public long updateTime() {
>>>>>>>>>> return ver.globalTime();
>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Than is better to replace this variable?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> 3 марта 2017 г., в 19:19, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I think the next implementation will be good enough:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() {
>>>>>>>>>>> return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(nodeOrderDrId, topVer), order);
>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Serialization/deserialization of GridCacheVersion.globalTime field
>>>>>>>>>>> should be removed.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 5:57 PM, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Alexey,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() {
>>>>>>>>>>>> return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(nodeOrderDrId << 32, topVer << 32),
>>>>>>>> order);
>>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> So you want to change or not?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> And
>>>>>>>>>>>> - GridCacheVersion.writeTo(ByteBuffer buf, MessageWriter writer)
>>>>>>>>>>>> - GridCacheVersion.readFrom(ByteBuffer buf, MessageReader reader)
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> use globalTime variable, must be removed case 0: (in both methods) or
>>>>>>>> replace globalTime?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2 марта 2017 г., в 16:58, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Removing of asGridUuid() method can lead to much code changes but it
>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be avoided on this step.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 4:56 PM, Alexey Goncharuk
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I see several usages of asGridUuid() method, so I would just remove
>>>>>>>> global
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> time and use nodeOrderDrId and topVer as different parts of high
>>>>>>>> and low
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> parts of the embedded UUID.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --AG
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2017-03-02 12:39 GMT+03:00 Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> When removed parameter globalTime, in method:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() {
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(((long)topVer << 32) |
>>>>>>>> nodeOrderDrId,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> globalTime), order);
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> globalTime parameter replaced by something or remove this method?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2 марта 2017 г., в 12:07, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please review PR again.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 18:47, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]>
>>>>>>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think that it is ok.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 6:34 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
>>>>>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ok. What do you say for the rest?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 18:15, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]>
>>>>>>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think that during renaming we should not lose "Atomic"
>>>>>>>> prefix.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 5:16 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
>>>>>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey, ok.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Also remove in the modules/platform/dotnet
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode.cs?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rename classes:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.startGrids ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.startGridsLocal (commit)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderWithStoreInvokeTest ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheWithStoreInvokeTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderInvokeTest ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheInvokeTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderNearEnabledStoreValueTest
>>>>>>>> ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheNearEnabledStoreValueTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderNearRemoveFailureTest ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheNearRemoveFailureTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderRemoveFailureTest ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheRemoveFailureTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderFailoverSelfTest ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheFailoverSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheValueConsistencyAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderNearEnabledS
>>>>>>>> elfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -> GridCacheValueConsistencyNearEnabledSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryAsyncFailoverAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>>>>>>>> ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryAsyncFailoverSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryFailoverAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>>>>>>>> ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryFailoverSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.testNoBackupsPrimaryWriteOrder
>>>>>>>> ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.testNoBackups
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.
>>>>>>>> testWithBackupsPrimaryWriteOrder
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.testWithBackups
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Remove classes:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderStoreValueTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheReplicatedAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderMultiNodeFullApiSe
>>>>>>>> lfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderMultiNodeFullApiSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderMultiNodeP2PDisabledFullApiS
>>>>>>>> elfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWrityOrderOffHeapMultiNodeFullApiSelfT
>>>>>>>> est
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderOffHeapFullApiSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderFullApiSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderReloadAllSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCachePutRetryAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheValueConsistencyAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderExpiryPolicyTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ok? :)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 2:04, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]>
>>>>>>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No, it should be removed. If somebody use entry last update
>>>>>>>> time
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (e.g.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for conflict resolving) they should store this time as entry
>>>>>>>> field.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 12:57 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Do we still need GridClockSyncProcessor?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 5:26 AM, Andrey Gura <
>>>>>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, this setting doesn't make sense anymore. So we need
>>>>>>>> remove
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> related methods.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Also there is component called GridClockSyncProcessor that
>>>>>>>> also
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be removed. It will lead to removing globalTime field from
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheVersion class and some related methods.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 3:21 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Valentin,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then there is no need for setting CacheConfiguration.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> atomicWriteOrderMode.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What do you think, remove it and and related methods?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 28 февр. 2017 г., в 2:49, Valentin Kulichenko <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email]> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Max,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In case we remove the CLOCK mode, I think we should
>>>>>>>> remove the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enum
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> too, as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> well as configuration properties and other code using
>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enum. Having
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enum with one value doesn't make sense to me.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Val
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 5:09 AM, Kozlov Maxim <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Igniters,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> After remove CLOCK mode, CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode enum
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contains now
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> only
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> one value PRIMARY. Andrey Gura, proposition remove
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode enum. Will there be something
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> special for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> purpose is enum?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jira: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4587
>>>>>>>> <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4587>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Best Regards,
>>>> Max K.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>> --
>> Best Regards,
>> Max K.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>

--
Best Regards,
Max K.

[Kozlov Maxim]

Denis, I can not edit this page.

confluence username: dreamx

> 13 марта 2017 г., в 19:01, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]> написал(а):
>
> Denis,
>
> ok
>
>> 13 марта 2017 г., в 18:59, Denis Magda <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> написал(а):
>>
>> Maxim,
>>
>> Please update Apache Ignite 2.0 migration guide:
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.0+Migration+Guide <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.0+Migration+Guide> <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.0+Migration+Guide <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.0+Migration+Guide>>
>>
>> You need to say that the parameter has been discontinued and the users can use CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode.PRIMARY instead.
>>
>> Agreed?
>>
>> —
>> Denis
>>
>>> On Mar 10, 2017, at 12:06 AM, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Andrey, Alexey, please review
>>> PR - https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521 <https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521> <https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521 <https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521>>
>>> tests - http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests_RunAll&branch_IgniteTests=pull%2F1521%2Fhead&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv <http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests_RunAll&branch_IgniteTests=pull%2F1521%2Fhead&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv> <http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests_RunAll&branch_IgniteTests=pull/1521/head&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv <http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests_RunAll&branch_IgniteTests=pull/1521/head&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv>>
>>>
>>>> 7 марта 2017 г., в 14:15, Andrey Gura <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> написал(а):
>>>>
>>>> Maxim,
>>>>
>>>> all GridClockSyncProcessor related code should be remove (objects,
>>>> messages, etc)
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 12:23 PM, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>>>>> Andrey, or better remove GridTimeSyncProcessorSelfTest class?
>>>>>
>>>>>> 7 марта 2017 г., в 12:21, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> написал(а):
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Andrey, in GridTimeSyncProcessorSelfTest class methods: testTimeSync() and testTimeSyncChangeCoordinator() also removed?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 6 марта 2017 г., в 18:42, Andrey Gura <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> About SER_VER_COMPARATOR. You can use code branch that executes when
>>>>>>> times are equal:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> int nodeOrder1 = ver1.nodeOrder();
>>>>>>> int nodeOrder2 = ver2.nodeOrder();
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> if (nodeOrder1 == nodeOrder2) {
>>>>>>> long order1 = ver1.order();
>>>>>>> long order2 = ver2.order();
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> assert order1 != order2;
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> return order1 > order2 ? 1 : -1;
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>> else
>>>>>>> return nodeOrder1 > nodeOrder2 ? 1 : -1;
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 6:32 PM, Alexey Goncharuk
>>>>>>> <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Global time comparison is only needed for CLOCK mode, so you should modify
>>>>>>>> the code as if ignoreTime is always true.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2017-03-06 18:13 GMT+03:00 Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ok,
>>>>>>>>> in GridCacheAtomicVersionComparator class, method
>>>>>>>>> compare(GridCacheVersion one, GridCacheVersion other, boolean ignoreTime)
>>>>>>>>> if (globalTime == otherGlobalTime || ignoreTime) {  // => if (ignoreTime) {
>>>>>>>>> .....
>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>> else
>>>>>>>>> return globalTime > otherGlobalTime ? 1 : -1;   // => return -1;
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> and,
>>>>>>>>> GridCacheMvcc class,
>>>>>>>>> SER_VER_COMPARATOR is comparator by globalTime var. His remove and remove
>>>>>>>>> compareSerializableVersion?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 6 марта 2017 г., в 16:51, Andrey Gura <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> updateTime() method should be removed.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 12:12 PM, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> In CacheEntryImplEx class use ver.globalTime() in
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> @Override public long updateTime() {
>>>>>>>>>>> return ver.globalTime();
>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Than is better to replace this variable?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> 3 марта 2017 г., в 19:19, Andrey Gura <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I think the next implementation will be good enough:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() {
>>>>>>>>>>>> return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(nodeOrderDrId, topVer), order);
>>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Serialization/deserialization of GridCacheVersion.globalTime field
>>>>>>>>>>>> should be removed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 5:57 PM, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Alexey,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() {
>>>>>>>>>>>>> return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(nodeOrderDrId << 32, topVer << 32),
>>>>>>>>> order);
>>>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> So you want to change or not?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> And
>>>>>>>>>>>>> - GridCacheVersion.writeTo(ByteBuffer buf, MessageWriter writer)
>>>>>>>>>>>>> - GridCacheVersion.readFrom(ByteBuffer buf, MessageReader reader)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> use globalTime variable, must be removed case 0: (in both methods) or
>>>>>>>>> replace globalTime?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2 марта 2017 г., в 16:58, Andrey Gura <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Removing of asGridUuid() method can lead to much code changes but it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be avoided on this step.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 4:56 PM, Alexey Goncharuk
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I see several usages of asGridUuid() method, so I would just remove
>>>>>>>>> global
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> time and use nodeOrderDrId and topVer as different parts of high
>>>>>>>>> and low
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> parts of the embedded UUID.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --AG
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2017-03-02 12:39 GMT+03:00 Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> When removed parameter globalTime, in method:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() {
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(((long)topVer << 32) |
>>>>>>>>> nodeOrderDrId,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> globalTime), order);
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> globalTime parameter replaced by something or remove this method?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2 марта 2017 г., в 12:07, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please review PR again.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 18:47, Andrey Gura <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>
>>>>>>>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think that it is ok.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 6:34 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
>>>>>>>>> [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ok. What do you say for the rest?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 18:15, Andrey Gura <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>
>>>>>>>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think that during renaming we should not lose "Atomic"
>>>>>>>>> prefix.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 5:16 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
>>>>>>>>> [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey, ok.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Also remove in the modules/platform/dotnet
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode.cs?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rename classes:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.startGrids ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.startGridsLocal (commit)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderWithStoreInvokeTest ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheWithStoreInvokeTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderInvokeTest ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheInvokeTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderNearEnabledStoreValueTest
>>>>>>>>> ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheNearEnabledStoreValueTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderNearRemoveFailureTest ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheNearRemoveFailureTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderRemoveFailureTest ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheRemoveFailureTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderFailoverSelfTest ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheFailoverSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheValueConsistencyAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderNearEnabledS
>>>>>>>>> elfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -> GridCacheValueConsistencyNearEnabledSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryAsyncFailoverAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>>>>>>>>> ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryAsyncFailoverSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryFailoverAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>>>>>>>>> ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryFailoverSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.testNoBackupsPrimaryWriteOrder
>>>>>>>>> ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.testNoBackups
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.
>>>>>>>>> testWithBackupsPrimaryWriteOrder
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.testWithBackups
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Remove classes:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderStoreValueTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheReplicatedAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderMultiNodeFullApiSe
>>>>>>>>> lfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderMultiNodeFullApiSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderMultiNodeP2PDisabledFullApiS
>>>>>>>>> elfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWrityOrderOffHeapMultiNodeFullApiSelfT
>>>>>>>>> est
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderOffHeapFullApiSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderFullApiSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderReloadAllSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCachePutRetryAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheValueConsistencyAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderExpiryPolicyTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ok? :)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 2:04, Andrey Gura <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>
>>>>>>>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No, it should be removed. If somebody use entry last update
>>>>>>>>> time
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (e.g.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for conflict resolving) they should store this time as entry
>>>>>>>>> field.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 12:57 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Do we still need GridClockSyncProcessor?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 5:26 AM, Andrey Gura <
>>>>>>>>> [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, this setting doesn't make sense anymore. So we need
>>>>>>>>> remove
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> related methods.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Also there is component called GridClockSyncProcessor that
>>>>>>>>> also
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be removed. It will lead to removing globalTime field from
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheVersion class and some related methods.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 3:21 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Valentin,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then there is no need for setting CacheConfiguration.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> atomicWriteOrderMode.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What do you think, remove it and and related methods?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 28 февр. 2017 г., в 2:49, Valentin Kulichenko <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Max,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In case we remove the CLOCK mode, I think we should
>>>>>>>>> remove the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enum
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> too, as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> well as configuration properties and other code using
>>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enum. Having
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enum with one value doesn't make sense to me.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Val
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 5:09 AM, Kozlov Maxim <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Igniters,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> After remove CLOCK mode, CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode enum
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contains now
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> only
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> one value PRIMARY. Andrey Gura, proposition remove
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode enum. Will there be something
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> special for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> purpose is enum?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jira: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4587 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4587>
>>>>>>>>> <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4587 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4587>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Best Regards,
>>> Max K.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
> --
> Best Regards,
> Max K.
>
>
>
>

--
Best Regards,
Max K.

[dmagda]

Weird, can you edit any other page? I can’t find any configuration parameters that should prevent you from editing.

—
Denis

> On Mar 13, 2017, at 9:14 AM, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Denis, I can not edit this page.
>
> confluence username: dreamx
>
>> 13 марта 2017 г., в 19:01, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> написал(а):
>>
>> Denis,
>>
>> ok
>>
>>> 13 марта 2017 г., в 18:59, Denis Magda <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>> написал(а):
>>>
>>> Maxim,
>>>
>>> Please update Apache Ignite 2.0 migration guide:
>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.0+Migration+Guide <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.0+Migration+Guide><https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.0+Migration+Guide <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.0+Migration+Guide>> <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.0+Migration+Guide <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.0+Migration+Guide><https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.0+Migration+Guide <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.0+Migration+Guide>>>
>>>
>>> You need to say that the parameter has been discontinued and the users can use CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode.PRIMARY instead.
>>>
>>> Agreed?
>>>
>>> —
>>> Denis
>>>
>>>> On Mar 10, 2017, at 12:06 AM, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Andrey, Alexey, please review
>>>> PR - https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521 <https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521> <https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521 <https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521>> <https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521 <https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521> <https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521 <https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521>>>
>>>> tests - http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests_RunAll&branch_IgniteTests=pull%2F1521%2Fhead&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv <http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests_RunAll&branch_IgniteTests=pull%2F1521%2Fhead&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv><http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests_RunAll&branch_IgniteTests=pull%2F1521%2Fhead&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv <http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests_RunAll&branch_IgniteTests=pull%2F1521%2Fhead&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv>> <http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests_RunAll&branch_IgniteTests=pull/1521/head&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv <http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests_RunAll&branch_IgniteTests=pull/1521/head&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv><http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests_RunAll&branch_IgniteTests=pull/1521/head&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv <http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests_RunAll&branch_IgniteTests=pull/1521/head&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv>>>
>>>>
>>>>> 7 марта 2017 г., в 14:15, Andrey Gura <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>> написал(а):
>>>>>
>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>
>>>>> all GridClockSyncProcessor related code should be remove (objects,
>>>>> messages, etc)
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 12:23 PM, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>> wrote:
>>>>>> Andrey, or better remove GridTimeSyncProcessorSelfTest class?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 7 марта 2017 г., в 12:21, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Andrey, in GridTimeSyncProcessorSelfTest class methods: testTimeSync() and testTimeSyncChangeCoordinator() also removed?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 6 марта 2017 г., в 18:42, Andrey Gura <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> About SER_VER_COMPARATOR. You can use code branch that executes when
>>>>>>>> times are equal:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> int nodeOrder1 = ver1.nodeOrder();
>>>>>>>> int nodeOrder2 = ver2.nodeOrder();
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> if (nodeOrder1 == nodeOrder2) {
>>>>>>>> long order1 = ver1.order();
>>>>>>>> long order2 = ver2.order();
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> assert order1 != order2;
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> return order1 > order2 ? 1 : -1;
>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>> else
>>>>>>>> return nodeOrder1 > nodeOrder2 ? 1 : -1;
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 6:32 PM, Alexey Goncharuk
>>>>>>>> <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Global time comparison is only needed for CLOCK mode, so you should modify
>>>>>>>>> the code as if ignoreTime is always true.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 2017-03-06 18:13 GMT+03:00 Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>>:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> ok,
>>>>>>>>>> in GridCacheAtomicVersionComparator class, method
>>>>>>>>>> compare(GridCacheVersion one, GridCacheVersion other, boolean ignoreTime)
>>>>>>>>>> if (globalTime == otherGlobalTime || ignoreTime) {  // => if (ignoreTime) {
>>>>>>>>>> .....
>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>> else
>>>>>>>>>> return globalTime > otherGlobalTime ? 1 : -1;   // => return -1;
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> and,
>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheMvcc class,
>>>>>>>>>> SER_VER_COMPARATOR is comparator by globalTime var. His remove and remove
>>>>>>>>>> compareSerializableVersion?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> 6 марта 2017 г., в 16:51, Andrey Gura <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> updateTime() method should be removed.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 12:12 PM, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> In CacheEntryImplEx class use ver.globalTime() in
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> @Override public long updateTime() {
>>>>>>>>>>>> return ver.globalTime();
>>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Than is better to replace this variable?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3 марта 2017 г., в 19:19, Andrey Gura <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think the next implementation will be good enough:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() {
>>>>>>>>>>>>> return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(nodeOrderDrId, topVer), order);
>>>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Serialization/deserialization of GridCacheVersion.globalTime field
>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be removed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 5:57 PM, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Alexey,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() {
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(nodeOrderDrId << 32, topVer << 32),
>>>>>>>>>> order);
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So you want to change or not?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - GridCacheVersion.writeTo(ByteBuffer buf, MessageWriter writer)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - GridCacheVersion.readFrom(ByteBuffer buf, MessageReader reader)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> use globalTime variable, must be removed case 0: (in both methods) or
>>>>>>>>>> replace globalTime?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2 марта 2017 г., в 16:58, Andrey Gura <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Removing of asGridUuid() method can lead to much code changes but it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be avoided on this step.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 4:56 PM, Alexey Goncharuk
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I see several usages of asGridUuid() method, so I would just remove
>>>>>>>>>> global
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> time and use nodeOrderDrId and topVer as different parts of high
>>>>>>>>>> and low
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> parts of the embedded UUID.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --AG
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2017-03-02 12:39 GMT+03:00 Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]><mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>>:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> When removed parameter globalTime, in method:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() {
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(((long)topVer << 32) |
>>>>>>>>>> nodeOrderDrId,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> globalTime), order);
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> globalTime parameter replaced by something or remove this method?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2 марта 2017 г., в 12:07, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please review PR again.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 18:47, Andrey Gura <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>>
>>>>>>>>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think that it is ok.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 6:34 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ok. What do you say for the rest?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 18:15, Andrey Gura <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>>
>>>>>>>>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think that during renaming we should not lose "Atomic"
>>>>>>>>>> prefix.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 5:16 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey, ok.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Also remove in the modules/platform/dotnet
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode.cs?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rename classes:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.startGrids ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.startGridsLocal (commit)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderWithStoreInvokeTest ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheWithStoreInvokeTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderInvokeTest ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheInvokeTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderNearEnabledStoreValueTest
>>>>>>>>>> ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheNearEnabledStoreValueTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderNearRemoveFailureTest ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheNearRemoveFailureTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderRemoveFailureTest ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheRemoveFailureTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderFailoverSelfTest ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheFailoverSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheValueConsistencyAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderNearEnabledS
>>>>>>>>>> elfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -> GridCacheValueConsistencyNearEnabledSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryAsyncFailoverAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>> ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryAsyncFailoverSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryFailoverAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>> ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryFailoverSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.testNoBackupsPrimaryWriteOrder
>>>>>>>>>> ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.testNoBackups
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.
>>>>>>>>>> testWithBackupsPrimaryWriteOrder
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.testWithBackups
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Remove classes:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderStoreValueTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheReplicatedAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderMultiNodeFullApiSe
>>>>>>>>>> lfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderMultiNodeFullApiSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderMultiNodeP2PDisabledFullApiS
>>>>>>>>>> elfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWrityOrderOffHeapMultiNodeFullApiSelfT
>>>>>>>>>> est
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderOffHeapFullApiSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderFullApiSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderReloadAllSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCachePutRetryAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheValueConsistencyAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderExpiryPolicyTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ok? :)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 2:04, Andrey Gura <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>>
>>>>>>>>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No, it should be removed. If somebody use entry last update
>>>>>>>>>> time
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (e.g.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for conflict resolving) they should store this time as entry
>>>>>>>>>> field.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 12:57 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Do we still need GridClockSyncProcessor?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 5:26 AM, Andrey Gura <
>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, this setting doesn't make sense anymore. So we need
>>>>>>>>>> remove
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> related methods.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Also there is component called GridClockSyncProcessor that
>>>>>>>>>> also
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be removed. It will lead to removing globalTime field from
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheVersion class and some related methods.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 3:21 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Valentin,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then there is no need for setting CacheConfiguration.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> atomicWriteOrderMode.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What do you think, remove it and and related methods?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 28 февр. 2017 г., в 2:49, Valentin Kulichenko <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Max,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In case we remove the CLOCK mode, I think we should
>>>>>>>>>> remove the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enum
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> too, as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> well as configuration properties and other code using
>>>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enum. Having
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enum with one value doesn't make sense to me.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Val
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 5:09 AM, Kozlov Maxim <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Igniters,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> After remove CLOCK mode, CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode enum
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contains now
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> only
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> one value PRIMARY. Andrey Gura, proposition remove
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode enum. Will there be something
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> special for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> purpose is enum?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jira: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4587 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4587><https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4587 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4587>>
>>>>>>>>>> <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4587 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4587>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Best Regards,
>>>> Max K.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Best Regards,
>> Max K.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> Best Regards,
> Max K.

[Kozlov Maxim]

No, I can not edit other pages.

Screenshots menu:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/hbhuk3tci7k77qr/%D0%A1%D0%BA%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%BD%D1%88%D0%BE%D1%82%202017-03-13%2019.51.30.png?dl=0
https://www.dropbox.com/s/43nr384icfb6xwp/%D0%A1%D0%BA%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%BD%D1%88%D0%BE%D1%82%202017-03-13%2019.50.24.png?dl=0

> 13 марта 2017 г., в 19:44, Denis Magda <[hidden email]> написал(а):
>
> Weird, can you edit any other page? I can’t find any configuration parameters that should prevent you from editing.
>
> —
> Denis
>
>> On Mar 13, 2017, at 9:14 AM, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Denis, I can not edit this page.
>>
>> confluence username: dreamx
>>
>>> 13 марта 2017 г., в 19:01, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> написал(а):
>>>
>>> Denis,
>>>
>>> ok
>>>
>>>> 13 марта 2017 г., в 18:59, Denis Magda <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>> написал(а):
>>>>
>>>> Maxim,
>>>>
>>>> Please update Apache Ignite 2.0 migration guide:
>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.0+Migration+Guide <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.0+Migration+Guide><https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.0+Migration+Guide <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.0+Migration+Guide>> <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.0+Migration+Guide <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.0+Migration+Guide><https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.0+Migration+Guide <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.0+Migration+Guide>>>
>>>>
>>>> You need to say that the parameter has been discontinued and the users can use CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode.PRIMARY instead.
>>>>
>>>> Agreed?
>>>>
>>>> —
>>>> Denis
>>>>
>>>>> On Mar 10, 2017, at 12:06 AM, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Andrey, Alexey, please review
>>>>> PR - https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521 <https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521> <https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521 <https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521>> <https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521 <https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521> <https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521 <https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521>>>
>>>>> tests - http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests_RunAll&branch_IgniteTests=pull%2F1521%2Fhead&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv <http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests_RunAll&branch_IgniteTests=pull%2F1521%2Fhead&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv><http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests_RunAll&branch_IgniteTests=pull%2F1521%2Fhead&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv <http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests_RunAll&branch_IgniteTests=pull%2F1521%2Fhead&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv>> <http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests_RunAll&branch_IgniteTests=pull/1521/head&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv <http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests_RunAll&branch_IgniteTests=pull/1521/head&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv><http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests_RunAll&branch_IgniteTests=pull/1521/head&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv <http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests_RunAll&branch_IgniteTests=pull/1521/head&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> 7 марта 2017 г., в 14:15, Andrey Gura <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> all GridClockSyncProcessor related code should be remove (objects,
>>>>>> messages, etc)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 12:23 PM, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> Andrey, or better remove GridTimeSyncProcessorSelfTest class?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 7 марта 2017 г., в 12:21, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Andrey, in GridTimeSyncProcessorSelfTest class methods: testTimeSync() and testTimeSyncChangeCoordinator() also removed?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 6 марта 2017 г., в 18:42, Andrey Gura <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> About SER_VER_COMPARATOR. You can use code branch that executes when
>>>>>>>>> times are equal:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> int nodeOrder1 = ver1.nodeOrder();
>>>>>>>>> int nodeOrder2 = ver2.nodeOrder();
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> if (nodeOrder1 == nodeOrder2) {
>>>>>>>>> long order1 = ver1.order();
>>>>>>>>> long order2 = ver2.order();
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> assert order1 != order2;
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> return order1 > order2 ? 1 : -1;
>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>> else
>>>>>>>>> return nodeOrder1 > nodeOrder2 ? 1 : -1;
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 6:32 PM, Alexey Goncharuk
>>>>>>>>> <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Global time comparison is only needed for CLOCK mode, so you should modify
>>>>>>>>>> the code as if ignoreTime is always true.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 2017-03-06 18:13 GMT+03:00 Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>>:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> ok,
>>>>>>>>>>> in GridCacheAtomicVersionComparator class, method
>>>>>>>>>>> compare(GridCacheVersion one, GridCacheVersion other, boolean ignoreTime)
>>>>>>>>>>> if (globalTime == otherGlobalTime || ignoreTime) {  // => if (ignoreTime) {
>>>>>>>>>>> .....
>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>> else
>>>>>>>>>>> return globalTime > otherGlobalTime ? 1 : -1;   // => return -1;
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> and,
>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheMvcc class,
>>>>>>>>>>> SER_VER_COMPARATOR is comparator by globalTime var. His remove and remove
>>>>>>>>>>> compareSerializableVersion?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> 6 марта 2017 г., в 16:51, Andrey Gura <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> updateTime() method should be removed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 12:12 PM, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> In CacheEntryImplEx class use ver.globalTime() in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> @Override public long updateTime() {
>>>>>>>>>>>>> return ver.globalTime();
>>>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Than is better to replace this variable?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3 марта 2017 г., в 19:19, Andrey Gura <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think the next implementation will be good enough:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() {
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(nodeOrderDrId, topVer), order);
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Serialization/deserialization of GridCacheVersion.globalTime field
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be removed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 5:57 PM, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Alexey,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() {
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(nodeOrderDrId << 32, topVer << 32),
>>>>>>>>>>> order);
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So you want to change or not?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - GridCacheVersion.writeTo(ByteBuffer buf, MessageWriter writer)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - GridCacheVersion.readFrom(ByteBuffer buf, MessageReader reader)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> use globalTime variable, must be removed case 0: (in both methods) or
>>>>>>>>>>> replace globalTime?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2 марта 2017 г., в 16:58, Andrey Gura <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Removing of asGridUuid() method can lead to much code changes but it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be avoided on this step.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 4:56 PM, Alexey Goncharuk
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I see several usages of asGridUuid() method, so I would just remove
>>>>>>>>>>> global
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> time and use nodeOrderDrId and topVer as different parts of high
>>>>>>>>>>> and low
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> parts of the embedded UUID.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --AG
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2017-03-02 12:39 GMT+03:00 Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]><mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>>:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> When removed parameter globalTime, in method:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() {
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(((long)topVer << 32) |
>>>>>>>>>>> nodeOrderDrId,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> globalTime), order);
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> globalTime parameter replaced by something or remove this method?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2 марта 2017 г., в 12:07, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please review PR again.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 18:47, Andrey Gura <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think that it is ok.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 6:34 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ok. What do you say for the rest?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 18:15, Andrey Gura <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think that during renaming we should not lose "Atomic"
>>>>>>>>>>> prefix.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 5:16 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey, ok.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Also remove in the modules/platform/dotnet
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode.cs?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rename classes:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.startGrids ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.startGridsLocal (commit)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderWithStoreInvokeTest ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheWithStoreInvokeTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderInvokeTest ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheInvokeTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderNearEnabledStoreValueTest
>>>>>>>>>>> ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheNearEnabledStoreValueTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderNearRemoveFailureTest ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheNearRemoveFailureTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderRemoveFailureTest ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheRemoveFailureTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderFailoverSelfTest ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheFailoverSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheValueConsistencyAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderNearEnabledS
>>>>>>>>>>> elfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -> GridCacheValueConsistencyNearEnabledSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryAsyncFailoverAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>> ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryAsyncFailoverSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryFailoverAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>> ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryFailoverSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.testNoBackupsPrimaryWriteOrder
>>>>>>>>>>> ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.testNoBackups
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.
>>>>>>>>>>> testWithBackupsPrimaryWriteOrder
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.testWithBackups
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Remove classes:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderStoreValueTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheReplicatedAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderMultiNodeFullApiSe
>>>>>>>>>>> lfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderMultiNodeFullApiSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderMultiNodeP2PDisabledFullApiS
>>>>>>>>>>> elfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWrityOrderOffHeapMultiNodeFullApiSelfT
>>>>>>>>>>> est
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderOffHeapFullApiSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderFullApiSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderReloadAllSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCachePutRetryAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheValueConsistencyAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderExpiryPolicyTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ok? :)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 2:04, Andrey Gura <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No, it should be removed. If somebody use entry last update
>>>>>>>>>>> time
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (e.g.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for conflict resolving) they should store this time as entry
>>>>>>>>>>> field.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 12:57 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Do we still need GridClockSyncProcessor?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 5:26 AM, Andrey Gura <
>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, this setting doesn't make sense anymore. So we need
>>>>>>>>>>> remove
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> related methods.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Also there is component called GridClockSyncProcessor that
>>>>>>>>>>> also
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be removed. It will lead to removing globalTime field from
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheVersion class and some related methods.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 3:21 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Valentin,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then there is no need for setting CacheConfiguration.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> atomicWriteOrderMode.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What do you think, remove it and and related methods?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 28 февр. 2017 г., в 2:49, Valentin Kulichenko <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Max,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In case we remove the CLOCK mode, I think we should
>>>>>>>>>>> remove the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enum
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> too, as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> well as configuration properties and other code using
>>>>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enum. Having
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enum with one value doesn't make sense to me.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Val
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 5:09 AM, Kozlov Maxim <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Igniters,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> After remove CLOCK mode, CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode enum
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contains now
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> only
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> one value PRIMARY. Andrey Gura, proposition remove
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode enum. Will there be something
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> special for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> purpose is enum?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jira: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4587 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4587><https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4587 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4587>>
>>>>>>>>>>> <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4587 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4587>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Best Regards,
>>> Max K.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Best Regards,
>> Max K.
>

--
Best Regards,
Max K.

[dmagda]

Well, looks like only committers can edit the pages.

Could you prepare the content and paste it here? I’ll update the migration guide for you.

—
Denis

> On Mar 13, 2017, at 9:59 AM, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> No, I can not edit other pages.
>
> Screenshots menu:
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/hbhuk3tci7k77qr/%D0%A1%D0%BA%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%BD%D1%88%D0%BE%D1%82%202017-03-13%2019.51.30.png?dl=0 <https://www.dropbox.com/s/hbhuk3tci7k77qr/%D0%A1%D0%BA%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%BD%D1%88%D0%BE%D1%82%202017-03-13%2019.51.30.png?dl=0>
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/43nr384icfb6xwp/%D0%A1%D0%BA%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%BD%D1%88%D0%BE%D1%82%202017-03-13%2019.50.24.png?dl=0 <https://www.dropbox.com/s/43nr384icfb6xwp/%D0%A1%D0%BA%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%BD%D1%88%D0%BE%D1%82%202017-03-13%2019.50.24.png?dl=0>
>
>
>> 13 марта 2017 г., в 19:44, Denis Magda <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> написал(а):
>>
>> Weird, can you edit any other page? I can’t find any configuration parameters that should prevent you from editing.
>>
>> —
>> Denis
>>
>>> On Mar 13, 2017, at 9:14 AM, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Denis, I can not edit this page.
>>>
>>> confluence username: dreamx
>>>
>>>> 13 марта 2017 г., в 19:01, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>> написал(а):
>>>>
>>>> Denis,
>>>>
>>>> ok
>>>>
>>>>> 13 марта 2017 г., в 18:59, Denis Magda <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]><mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>>> написал(а):
>>>>>
>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>
>>>>> Please update Apache Ignite 2.0 migration guide:
>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.0+Migration+Guide <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.0+Migration+Guide><https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.0+Migration+Guide <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.0+Migration+Guide>><https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.0+Migration+Guide <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.0+Migration+Guide><https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.0+Migration+Guide <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.0+Migration+Guide>>> <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.0+Migration+Guide <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.0+Migration+Guide><https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.0+Migration+Guide <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.0+Migration+Guide>><https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.0+Migration+Guide <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.0+Migration+Guide><https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.0+Migration+Guide <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.0+Migration+Guide>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> You need to say that the parameter has been discontinued and the users can use CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode.PRIMARY instead.
>>>>>
>>>>> Agreed?
>>>>>
>>>>> —
>>>>> Denis
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mar 10, 2017, at 12:06 AM, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Andrey, Alexey, please review
>>>>>> PR - https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521 <https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521> <https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521 <https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521>> <https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521 <https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521> <https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521 <https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521>>> <https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521 <https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521> <https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521 <https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521>> <https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521 <https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521> <https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521 <https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521>>>>
>>>>>> tests - http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests_RunAll&branch_IgniteTests=pull%2F1521%2Fhead&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv <http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests_RunAll&branch_IgniteTests=pull%2F1521%2Fhead&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv><http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests_RunAll&branch_IgniteTests=pull%2F1521%2Fhead&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv <http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests_RunAll&branch_IgniteTests=pull%2F1521%2Fhead&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv>><http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests_RunAll&branch_IgniteTests=pull%2F1521%2Fhead&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv <http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests_RunAll&branch_IgniteTests=pull%2F1521%2Fhead&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv><http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests_RunAll&branch_IgniteTests=pull%2F1521%2Fhead&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv <http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests_RunAll&branch_IgniteTests=pull%2F1521%2Fhead&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv>>> <http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests_RunAll&branch_IgniteTests=pull/1521/head&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv <http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests_RunAll&branch_IgniteTests=pull/1521/head&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv><http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests_RunAll&branch_IgniteTests=pull/1521/head&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv <http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests_RunAll&branch_IgniteTests=pull/1521/head&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv>><http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests_RunAll&branch_IgniteTests=pull/1521/head&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv <http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests_RunAll&branch_IgniteTests=pull/1521/head&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv><http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests_RunAll&branch_IgniteTests=pull/1521/head&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv <http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests_RunAll&branch_IgniteTests=pull/1521/head&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 7 марта 2017 г., в 14:15, Andrey Gura <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]><mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> all GridClockSyncProcessor related code should be remove (objects,
>>>>>>> messages, etc)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 12:23 PM, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Andrey, or better remove GridTimeSyncProcessorSelfTest class?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 7 марта 2017 г., в 12:21, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Andrey, in GridTimeSyncProcessorSelfTest class methods: testTimeSync() and testTimeSyncChangeCoordinator() also removed?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 6 марта 2017 г., в 18:42, Andrey Gura <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]><mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> About SER_VER_COMPARATOR. You can use code branch that executes when
>>>>>>>>>> times are equal:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> int nodeOrder1 = ver1.nodeOrder();
>>>>>>>>>> int nodeOrder2 = ver2.nodeOrder();
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> if (nodeOrder1 == nodeOrder2) {
>>>>>>>>>> long order1 = ver1.order();
>>>>>>>>>> long order2 = ver2.order();
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> assert order1 != order2;
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> return order1 > order2 ? 1 : -1;
>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>> else
>>>>>>>>>> return nodeOrder1 > nodeOrder2 ? 1 : -1;
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 6:32 PM, Alexey Goncharuk
>>>>>>>>>> <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]><mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Global time comparison is only needed for CLOCK mode, so you should modify
>>>>>>>>>>> the code as if ignoreTime is always true.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> 2017-03-06 18:13 GMT+03:00 Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>>>:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> ok,
>>>>>>>>>>>> in GridCacheAtomicVersionComparator class, method
>>>>>>>>>>>> compare(GridCacheVersion one, GridCacheVersion other, boolean ignoreTime)
>>>>>>>>>>>> if (globalTime == otherGlobalTime || ignoreTime) {  // => if (ignoreTime) {
>>>>>>>>>>>> .....
>>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>>> else
>>>>>>>>>>>> return globalTime > otherGlobalTime ? 1 : -1;   // => return -1;
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> and,
>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheMvcc class,
>>>>>>>>>>>> SER_VER_COMPARATOR is comparator by globalTime var. His remove and remove
>>>>>>>>>>>> compareSerializableVersion?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 6 марта 2017 г., в 16:51, Andrey Gura <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> updateTime() method should be removed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 12:12 PM, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In CacheEntryImplEx class use ver.globalTime() in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> @Override public long updateTime() {
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> return ver.globalTime();
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Than is better to replace this variable?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3 марта 2017 г., в 19:19, Andrey Gura <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think the next implementation will be good enough:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() {
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(nodeOrderDrId, topVer), order);
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Serialization/deserialization of GridCacheVersion.globalTime field
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be removed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 5:57 PM, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Alexey,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() {
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(nodeOrderDrId << 32, topVer << 32),
>>>>>>>>>>>> order);
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So you want to change or not?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - GridCacheVersion.writeTo(ByteBuffer buf, MessageWriter writer)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - GridCacheVersion.readFrom(ByteBuffer buf, MessageReader reader)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> use globalTime variable, must be removed case 0: (in both methods) or
>>>>>>>>>>>> replace globalTime?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2 марта 2017 г., в 16:58, Andrey Gura <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Removing of asGridUuid() method can lead to much code changes but it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be avoided on this step.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 4:56 PM, Alexey Goncharuk
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I see several usages of asGridUuid() method, so I would just remove
>>>>>>>>>>>> global
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> time and use nodeOrderDrId and topVer as different parts of high
>>>>>>>>>>>> and low
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> parts of the embedded UUID.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --AG
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2017-03-02 12:39 GMT+03:00 Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]><mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>><mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]><mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>>>:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> When removed parameter globalTime, in method:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() {
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(((long)topVer << 32) |
>>>>>>>>>>>> nodeOrderDrId,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> globalTime), order);
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> globalTime parameter replaced by something or remove this method?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2 марта 2017 г., в 12:07, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]><mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]><mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please review PR again.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 18:47, Andrey Gura <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think that it is ok.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 6:34 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
>>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]><mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ok. What do you say for the rest?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 18:15, Andrey Gura <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think that during renaming we should not lose "Atomic"
>>>>>>>>>>>> prefix.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 5:16 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
>>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]><mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey, ok.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Also remove in the modules/platform/dotnet
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode.cs?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rename classes:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.startGrids ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.startGridsLocal (commit)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderWithStoreInvokeTest ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheWithStoreInvokeTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderInvokeTest ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheInvokeTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderNearEnabledStoreValueTest
>>>>>>>>>>>> ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheNearEnabledStoreValueTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderNearRemoveFailureTest ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheNearRemoveFailureTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderRemoveFailureTest ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheRemoveFailureTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderFailoverSelfTest ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheFailoverSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheValueConsistencyAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderNearEnabledS
>>>>>>>>>>>> elfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -> GridCacheValueConsistencyNearEnabledSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryAsyncFailoverAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>> ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryAsyncFailoverSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryFailoverAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>> ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryFailoverSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.testNoBackupsPrimaryWriteOrder
>>>>>>>>>>>> ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.testNoBackups
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.
>>>>>>>>>>>> testWithBackupsPrimaryWriteOrder
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.testWithBackups
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Remove classes:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderStoreValueTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheReplicatedAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderMultiNodeFullApiSe
>>>>>>>>>>>> lfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderMultiNodeFullApiSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderMultiNodeP2PDisabledFullApiS
>>>>>>>>>>>> elfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWrityOrderOffHeapMultiNodeFullApiSelfT
>>>>>>>>>>>> est
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderOffHeapFullApiSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderFullApiSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderReloadAllSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCachePutRetryAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheValueConsistencyAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderExpiryPolicyTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ok? :)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 2:04, Andrey Gura <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No, it should be removed. If somebody use entry last update
>>>>>>>>>>>> time
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (e.g.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for conflict resolving) they should store this time as entry
>>>>>>>>>>>> field.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 12:57 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Do we still need GridClockSyncProcessor?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 5:26 AM, Andrey Gura <
>>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, this setting doesn't make sense anymore. So we need
>>>>>>>>>>>> remove
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> related methods.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Also there is component called GridClockSyncProcessor that
>>>>>>>>>>>> also
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be removed. It will lead to removing globalTime field from
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheVersion class and some related methods.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 3:21 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]><mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Valentin,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then there is no need for setting CacheConfiguration.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> atomicWriteOrderMode.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What do you think, remove it and and related methods?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 28 февр. 2017 г., в 2:49, Valentin Kulichenko <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Max,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In case we remove the CLOCK mode, I think we should
>>>>>>>>>>>> remove the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enum
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> too, as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> well as configuration properties and other code using
>>>>>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enum. Having
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enum with one value doesn't make sense to me.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Val
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 5:09 AM, Kozlov Maxim <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]><mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Igniters,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> After remove CLOCK mode, CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode enum
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contains now
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> only
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> one value PRIMARY. Andrey Gura, proposition remove
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode enum. Will there be something
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> special for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> purpose is enum?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jira: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4587 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4587><https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4587 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4587>><https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4587 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4587><https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4587 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4587>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4587 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4587>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Best Regards,
>>>> Max K.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Best Regards,
>>> Max K.
>>
>
> --
> Best Regards,
> Max K.

[Alexey Kuznetsov]

Maxim,

Could you merge master to your PR?
I failed to review Web Console files due to conflicts.

Thanks.

On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 3:06 PM, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Andrey, Alexey, please review
> PR - https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521 <
> https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521>
> tests - http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=
> IgniteTests_RunAll&branch_IgniteTests=pull%2F1521%
> 2Fhead&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv <http://ci.ignite.apache.org/
> viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests_RunAll&branch_
> IgniteTests=pull/1521/head&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv>
>
> > 7 марта 2017 г., в 14:15, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]> написал(а):
> >
> > Maxim,
> >
> > all GridClockSyncProcessor related code should be remove (objects,
> > messages, etc)
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 12:23 PM, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> >> Andrey, or better remove GridTimeSyncProcessorSelfTest class?
> >>
> >>> 7 марта 2017 г., в 12:21, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>
> написал(а):
> >>>
> >>> Andrey, in GridTimeSyncProcessorSelfTest class methods: testTimeSync()
> and testTimeSyncChangeCoordinator() also removed?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> 6 марта 2017 г., в 18:42, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]> написал(а):
> >>>>
> >>>> Maxim,
> >>>>
> >>>> About SER_VER_COMPARATOR. You can use code branch that executes when
> >>>> times are equal:
> >>>>
> >>>> int nodeOrder1 = ver1.nodeOrder();
> >>>> int nodeOrder2 = ver2.nodeOrder();
> >>>>
> >>>> if (nodeOrder1 == nodeOrder2) {
> >>>>  long order1 = ver1.order();
> >>>>  long order2 = ver2.order();
> >>>>
> >>>>  assert order1 != order2;
> >>>>
> >>>>  return order1 > order2 ? 1 : -1;
> >>>> }
> >>>> else
> >>>>  return nodeOrder1 > nodeOrder2 ? 1 : -1;
> >>>>
> >>>> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 6:32 PM, Alexey Goncharuk
> >>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>>>> Maxim,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Global time comparison is only needed for CLOCK mode, so you should
> modify
> >>>>> the code as if ignoreTime is always true.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 2017-03-06 18:13 GMT+03:00 Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> ok,
> >>>>>> in GridCacheAtomicVersionComparator class, method
> >>>>>> compare(GridCacheVersion one, GridCacheVersion other, boolean
> ignoreTime)
> >>>>>> if (globalTime == otherGlobalTime || ignoreTime) {  // => if
> (ignoreTime) {
> >>>>>> .....
> >>>>>> }
> >>>>>> else
> >>>>>>  return globalTime > otherGlobalTime ? 1 : -1;   // => return -1;
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> and,
> >>>>>> GridCacheMvcc class,
> >>>>>> SER_VER_COMPARATOR is comparator by globalTime var. His remove and
> remove
> >>>>>> compareSerializableVersion?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> 6 марта 2017 г., в 16:51, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]>
> написал(а):
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Maxim,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> updateTime() method should be removed.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 12:12 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
> [hidden email]>
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> In CacheEntryImplEx class use ver.globalTime() in
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> @Override public long updateTime() {
> >>>>>>>> return ver.globalTime();
> >>>>>>>> }
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Than is better to replace this variable?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> 3 марта 2017 г., в 19:19, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]>
> написал(а):
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Maxim,
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I think the next implementation will be good enough:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() {
> >>>>>>>>> return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(nodeOrderDrId, topVer), order);
> >>>>>>>>> }
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Serialization/deserialization of GridCacheVersion.globalTime
> field
> >>>>>>>>> should be removed.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 5:57 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
> [hidden email]>
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> Alexey,
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() {
> >>>>>>>>>> return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(nodeOrderDrId << 32, topVer <<
> 32),
> >>>>>> order);
> >>>>>>>>>> }
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> So you want to change or not?
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> And
> >>>>>>>>>> - GridCacheVersion.writeTo(ByteBuffer buf, MessageWriter
> writer)
> >>>>>>>>>> - GridCacheVersion.readFrom(ByteBuffer buf, MessageReader
> reader)
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> use globalTime variable, must be removed case 0: (in both
> methods) or
> >>>>>> replace globalTime?
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> 2 марта 2017 г., в 16:58, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]>
> написал(а):
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> +1
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Removing of asGridUuid() method can lead to much code changes
> but it
> >>>>>>>>>>> should be avoided on this step.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 4:56 PM, Alexey Goncharuk
> >>>>>>>>>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> I see several usages of asGridUuid() method, so I would just
> remove
> >>>>>> global
> >>>>>>>>>>>> time and use nodeOrderDrId and topVer as different parts of
> high
> >>>>>> and low
> >>>>>>>>>>>> parts of the embedded UUID.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> --AG
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> 2017-03-02 12:39 GMT+03:00 Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]
> >:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> When removed parameter globalTime, in method:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() {
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(((long)topVer << 32) |
> >>>>>> nodeOrderDrId,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> globalTime), order);
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> }
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> globalTime parameter replaced by something or remove this
> method?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2 марта 2017 г., в 12:07, Kozlov Maxim <
> [hidden email]>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> написал(а):
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please review PR again.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 18:47, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]>
> >>>>>> написал(а):
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think that it is ok.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 6:34 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
> >>>>>> [hidden email]>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ok. What do you say for the rest?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 18:15, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]>
> >>>>>> написал(а):
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think that during renaming we should not lose "Atomic"
> >>>>>> prefix.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 5:16 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
> >>>>>> [hidden email]>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey, ok.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Also remove in the modules/platform/dotnet
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode.cs?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rename classes:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.startGrids ->
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.startGridsLocal (commit)
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderWithStoreInvokeTest
> ->
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheWithStoreInvokeTest
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderInvokeTest ->
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheInvokeTest
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteO
> rderNearEnabledStoreValueTest
> >>>>>> ->
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheNearEnabledStoreValueTest
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderNearRemoveFailureTest
> ->
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheNearRemoveFailureTest
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderRemoveFailureTest ->
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheRemoveFailureTest
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderFailoverSelfTest ->
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheFailoverSelfTest
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheValueConsistencyAtomi
> cPrimaryWriteOrderNearEnabledS
> >>>>>> elfTest
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -> GridCacheValueConsistencyNearEnabledSelfTest
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryAsyncFailo
> verAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
> >>>>>> ->
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryAsyncFailoverSelfTest
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryFailoverAt
> omicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
> >>>>>> ->
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryFailoverSelfTest
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.
> testNoBackupsPrimaryWriteOrder
> >>>>>> ->
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.testNoBackups
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.
> >>>>>> testWithBackupsPrimaryWriteOrder
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.testWithBackups
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Remove classes:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderStoreValueTest
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheReplicatedAtomicPrima
> ryWriteOrderMultiNodeFullApiSe
> >>>>>> lfTest
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrd
> erMultiNodeFullApiSelfTest
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrd
> erMultiNodeP2PDisabledFullApiS
> >>>>>> elfTest
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWrityOrd
> erOffHeapMultiNodeFullApiSelfT
> >>>>>> est
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderOffHeapFullApiSelfTest
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderFullApiSelfTest
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderReloadAllSelfTest
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCachePutRetryAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheValueConsistencyAtomi
> cPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderExpiryPolicyTest
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ok? :)
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 2:04, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]
> >
> >>>>>> написал(а):
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No, it should be removed. If somebody use entry last
> update
> >>>>>> time
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> (e.g.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for conflict resolving) they should store this time as
> entry
> >>>>>> field.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 12:57 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Do we still need GridClockSyncProcessor?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 5:26 AM, Andrey Gura <
> >>>>>> [hidden email]>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, this setting doesn't make sense anymore. So we
> need
> >>>>>> remove
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> all
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> related methods.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Also there is component called
> GridClockSyncProcessor that
> >>>>>> also
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> should
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be removed. It will lead to removing globalTime
> field from
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheVersion class and some related methods.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 3:21 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email]>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Valentin,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then there is no need for setting
> CacheConfiguration.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> atomicWriteOrderMode.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What do you think, remove it and and related methods?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 28 февр. 2017 г., в 2:49, Valentin Kulichenko <
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email]> написал(а):
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Max,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In case we remove the CLOCK mode, I think we should
> >>>>>> remove the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> enum
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> too, as
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> well as configuration properties and other code
> using
> >>>>>> this
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> enum. Having
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enum with one value doesn't make sense to me.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Val
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 5:09 AM, Kozlov Maxim <
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email]>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Igniters,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> After remove CLOCK mode,
> CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode enum
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> contains now
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> only
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> one value PRIMARY. Andrey Gura, proposition remove
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode enum. Will there be
> something
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> special for
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> purpose is enum?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jira: https://issues.apache.org/
> jira/browse/IGNITE-4587
> >>>>>> <
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4587
> >
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
> >>>>>>>>>> Max K.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>> Best Regards,
> >>>>>>>> Max K.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> --
> >>>>>> Best Regards,
> >>>>>> Max K.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Best Regards,
> >>> Max K.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Best Regards,
> >> Max K.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
> --
> Best Regards,
> Max K.
>
>
>
>
>

--
Alexey Kuznetsov

[Alexey Kuznetsov-2]

Maxim,

I managed to review Web Console part in your PR.
Looks good for me.

But it seems that you also should delete following properties on
IgniteConfiguration
  getClockSyncFrequency();
  getClockSyncSamples();

Once you delete them - you should also delete them on WebConsole also.

P.S. do not forget to merge master to you PR.


On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 10:35 AM, Alexey Kuznetsov <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Maxim,
>
> Could you merge master to your PR?
> I failed to review Web Console files due to conflicts.
>
> Thanks.
>
> On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 3:06 PM, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>> Andrey, Alexey, please review
>> PR - https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521 <
>> https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521>
>> tests - http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=Ignite
>> Tests_RunAll&branch_IgniteTests=pull%2F1521%2Fhead&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv
>> <http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=Ignit
>> eTests_RunAll&branch_IgniteTests=pull/1521/head&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv>
>>
>> > 7 марта 2017 г., в 14:15, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]> написал(а):
>> >
>> > Maxim,
>> >
>> > all GridClockSyncProcessor related code should be remove (objects,
>> > messages, etc)
>> >
>> > On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 12:23 PM, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>> >> Andrey, or better remove GridTimeSyncProcessorSelfTest class?
>> >>
>> >>> 7 марта 2017 г., в 12:21, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>
>> написал(а):
>> >>>
>> >>> Andrey, in GridTimeSyncProcessorSelfTest class methods:
>> testTimeSync() and testTimeSyncChangeCoordinator() also removed?
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>> 6 марта 2017 г., в 18:42, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]> написал(а):
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Maxim,
>> >>>>
>> >>>> About SER_VER_COMPARATOR. You can use code branch that executes when
>> >>>> times are equal:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> int nodeOrder1 = ver1.nodeOrder();
>> >>>> int nodeOrder2 = ver2.nodeOrder();
>> >>>>
>> >>>> if (nodeOrder1 == nodeOrder2) {
>> >>>>  long order1 = ver1.order();
>> >>>>  long order2 = ver2.order();
>> >>>>
>> >>>>  assert order1 != order2;
>> >>>>
>> >>>>  return order1 > order2 ? 1 : -1;
>> >>>> }
>> >>>> else
>> >>>>  return nodeOrder1 > nodeOrder2 ? 1 : -1;
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 6:32 PM, Alexey Goncharuk
>> >>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> >>>>> Maxim,
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Global time comparison is only needed for CLOCK mode, so you should
>> modify
>> >>>>> the code as if ignoreTime is always true.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> 2017-03-06 18:13 GMT+03:00 Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> ok,
>> >>>>>> in GridCacheAtomicVersionComparator class, method
>> >>>>>> compare(GridCacheVersion one, GridCacheVersion other, boolean
>> ignoreTime)
>> >>>>>> if (globalTime == otherGlobalTime || ignoreTime) {  // => if
>> (ignoreTime) {
>> >>>>>> .....
>> >>>>>> }
>> >>>>>> else
>> >>>>>>  return globalTime > otherGlobalTime ? 1 : -1;   // => return -1;
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> and,
>> >>>>>> GridCacheMvcc class,
>> >>>>>> SER_VER_COMPARATOR is comparator by globalTime var. His remove and
>> remove
>> >>>>>> compareSerializableVersion?
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> 6 марта 2017 г., в 16:51, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]>
>> написал(а):
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Maxim,
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> updateTime() method should be removed.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 12:12 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
>> [hidden email]>
>> >>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>> In CacheEntryImplEx class use ver.globalTime() in
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> @Override public long updateTime() {
>> >>>>>>>> return ver.globalTime();
>> >>>>>>>> }
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Than is better to replace this variable?
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> 3 марта 2017 г., в 19:19, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]>
>> написал(а):
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> I think the next implementation will be good enough:
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() {
>> >>>>>>>>> return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(nodeOrderDrId, topVer), order);
>> >>>>>>>>> }
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Serialization/deserialization of GridCacheVersion.globalTime
>> field
>> >>>>>>>>> should be removed.
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 5:57 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
>> [hidden email]>
>> >>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>> Alexey,
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() {
>> >>>>>>>>>> return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(nodeOrderDrId << 32, topVer <<
>> 32),
>> >>>>>> order);
>> >>>>>>>>>> }
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> So you want to change or not?
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> And
>> >>>>>>>>>> - GridCacheVersion.writeTo(ByteBuffer buf, MessageWriter
>> writer)
>> >>>>>>>>>> - GridCacheVersion.readFrom(ByteBuffer buf, MessageReader
>> reader)
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> use globalTime variable, must be removed case 0: (in both
>> methods) or
>> >>>>>> replace globalTime?
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> 2 марта 2017 г., в 16:58, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]>
>> написал(а):
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> +1
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> Removing of asGridUuid() method can lead to much code changes
>> but it
>> >>>>>>>>>>> should be avoided on this step.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 4:56 PM, Alexey Goncharuk
>> >>>>>>>>>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I see several usages of asGridUuid() method, so I would just
>> remove
>> >>>>>> global
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> time and use nodeOrderDrId and topVer as different parts of
>> high
>> >>>>>> and low
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> parts of the embedded UUID.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> --AG
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> 2017-03-02 12:39 GMT+03:00 Kozlov Maxim <
>> [hidden email]>:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> When removed parameter globalTime, in method:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() {
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(((long)topVer << 32) |
>> >>>>>> nodeOrderDrId,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> globalTime), order);
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> }
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> globalTime parameter replaced by something or remove this
>> method?
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2 марта 2017 г., в 12:07, Kozlov Maxim <
>> [hidden email]>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> написал(а):
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please review PR again.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 18:47, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]>
>> >>>>>> написал(а):
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think that it is ok.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 6:34 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
>> >>>>>> [hidden email]>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ok. What do you say for the rest?
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 18:15, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]
>> >
>> >>>>>> написал(а):
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think that during renaming we should not lose "Atomic"
>> >>>>>> prefix.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 5:16 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
>> >>>>>> [hidden email]>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey, ok.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Also remove in the modules/platform/dotnet
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode.cs?
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rename classes:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.startGrids ->
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.startGridsLocal (commit)
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderWithStoreInvokeTest
>> ->
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheWithStoreInvokeTest
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderInvokeTest ->
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheInvokeTest
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteO
>> rderNearEnabledStoreValueTest
>> >>>>>> ->
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheNearEnabledStoreValueTest
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderNearRemoveFailureTest
>> ->
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheNearRemoveFailureTest
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderRemoveFailureTest ->
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheRemoveFailureTest
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderFailoverSelfTest ->
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheFailoverSelfTest
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheValueConsistencyAtomi
>> cPrimaryWriteOrderNearEnabledS
>> >>>>>> elfTest
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -> GridCacheValueConsistencyNearEnabledSelfTest
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryAsyncFailo
>> verAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>> >>>>>> ->
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryAsyncFailoverSelfTest
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryFailoverAt
>> omicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>> >>>>>> ->
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryFailoverSelfTest
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTe
>> st.testNoBackupsPrimaryWriteOrder
>> >>>>>> ->
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.testNoBackups
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.
>> >>>>>> testWithBackupsPrimaryWriteOrder
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.testWithBackups
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Remove classes:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderStoreValueTest
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheReplicatedAtomicPrima
>> ryWriteOrderMultiNodeFullApiSe
>> >>>>>> lfTest
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrd
>> erMultiNodeFullApiSelfTest
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrd
>> erMultiNodeP2PDisabledFullApiS
>> >>>>>> elfTest
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWrityOrd
>> erOffHeapMultiNodeFullApiSelfT
>> >>>>>> est
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderOffHeapFullApiSelfTest
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderFullApiSelfTest
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderReloadAllSelfTest
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCachePutRetryAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheValueConsistencyAtomi
>> cPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderExpiryPolicyTest
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ok? :)
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 2:04, Andrey Gura <
>> [hidden email]>
>> >>>>>> написал(а):
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No, it should be removed. If somebody use entry last
>> update
>> >>>>>> time
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> (e.g.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for conflict resolving) they should store this time
>> as entry
>> >>>>>> field.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 12:57 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Do we still need GridClockSyncProcessor?
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 5:26 AM, Andrey Gura <
>> >>>>>> [hidden email]>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, this setting doesn't make sense anymore. So we
>> need
>> >>>>>> remove
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> all
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> related methods.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Also there is component called
>> GridClockSyncProcessor that
>> >>>>>> also
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> should
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be removed. It will lead to removing globalTime
>> field from
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheVersion class and some related methods.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 3:21 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email]>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Valentin,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then there is no need for setting
>> CacheConfiguration.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> atomicWriteOrderMode.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What do you think, remove it and and related
>> methods?
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 28 февр. 2017 г., в 2:49, Valentin Kulichenko <
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email]> написал(а):
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Max,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In case we remove the CLOCK mode, I think we
>> should
>> >>>>>> remove the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> enum
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> too, as
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> well as configuration properties and other code
>> using
>> >>>>>> this
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> enum. Having
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enum with one value doesn't make sense to me.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Val
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 5:09 AM, Kozlov Maxim <
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email]>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Igniters,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> After remove CLOCK mode,
>> CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode enum
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> contains now
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> only
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> one value PRIMARY. Andrey Gura, proposition
>> remove
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode enum. Will there be
>> something
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> special for
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> purpose is enum?
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jira: https://issues.apache.org/jira
>> /browse/IGNITE-4587
>> >>>>>> <
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira
>> /browse/IGNITE-4587>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> --
>> >>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>> >>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> --
>> >>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>> >>>>>>>> Max K.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> --
>> >>>>>> Best Regards,
>> >>>>>> Max K.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>
>> >>> --
>> >>> Best Regards,
>> >>> Max K.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Best Regards,
>> >> Max K.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>> --
>> Best Regards,
>> Max K.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Alexey Kuznetsov
>

--
Alexey Kuznetsov
GridGain Systems
www.gridgain.com

[agura]

I've added comments about IgniteConfiguration to JIRA ticket.

On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 2:06 PM, Alexey Kuznetsov
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> Maxim,
>
> I managed to review Web Console part in your PR.
> Looks good for me.
>
> But it seems that you also should delete following properties on
> IgniteConfiguration
>   getClockSyncFrequency();
>   getClockSyncSamples();
>
> Once you delete them - you should also delete them on WebConsole also.
>
> P.S. do not forget to merge master to you PR.
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 10:35 AM, Alexey Kuznetsov <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>> Maxim,
>>
>> Could you merge master to your PR?
>> I failed to review Web Console files due to conflicts.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 3:06 PM, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Andrey, Alexey, please review
>>> PR - https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521 <
>>> https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521>
>>> tests - http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=Ignite
>>> Tests_RunAll&branch_IgniteTests=pull%2F1521%2Fhead&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv
>>> <http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=Ignit
>>> eTests_RunAll&branch_IgniteTests=pull/1521/head&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv>
>>>
>>> > 7 марта 2017 г., в 14:15, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]> написал(а):
>>> >
>>> > Maxim,
>>> >
>>> > all GridClockSyncProcessor related code should be remove (objects,
>>> > messages, etc)
>>> >
>>> > On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 12:23 PM, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>> >> Andrey, or better remove GridTimeSyncProcessorSelfTest class?
>>> >>
>>> >>> 7 марта 2017 г., в 12:21, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>
>>> написал(а):
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Andrey, in GridTimeSyncProcessorSelfTest class methods:
>>> testTimeSync() and testTimeSyncChangeCoordinator() also removed?
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>> 6 марта 2017 г., в 18:42, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]> написал(а):
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Maxim,
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> About SER_VER_COMPARATOR. You can use code branch that executes when
>>> >>>> times are equal:
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> int nodeOrder1 = ver1.nodeOrder();
>>> >>>> int nodeOrder2 = ver2.nodeOrder();
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> if (nodeOrder1 == nodeOrder2) {
>>> >>>>  long order1 = ver1.order();
>>> >>>>  long order2 = ver2.order();
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>  assert order1 != order2;
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>  return order1 > order2 ? 1 : -1;
>>> >>>> }
>>> >>>> else
>>> >>>>  return nodeOrder1 > nodeOrder2 ? 1 : -1;
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 6:32 PM, Alexey Goncharuk
>>> >>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> >>>>> Maxim,
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> Global time comparison is only needed for CLOCK mode, so you should
>>> modify
>>> >>>>> the code as if ignoreTime is always true.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> 2017-03-06 18:13 GMT+03:00 Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>:
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>> ok,
>>> >>>>>> in GridCacheAtomicVersionComparator class, method
>>> >>>>>> compare(GridCacheVersion one, GridCacheVersion other, boolean
>>> ignoreTime)
>>> >>>>>> if (globalTime == otherGlobalTime || ignoreTime) {  // => if
>>> (ignoreTime) {
>>> >>>>>> .....
>>> >>>>>> }
>>> >>>>>> else
>>> >>>>>>  return globalTime > otherGlobalTime ? 1 : -1;   // => return -1;
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> and,
>>> >>>>>> GridCacheMvcc class,
>>> >>>>>> SER_VER_COMPARATOR is comparator by globalTime var. His remove and
>>> remove
>>> >>>>>> compareSerializableVersion?
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> 6 марта 2017 г., в 16:51, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]>
>>> написал(а):
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> Maxim,
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> updateTime() method should be removed.
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 12:12 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
>>> [hidden email]>
>>> >>>>>> wrote:
>>> >>>>>>>> In CacheEntryImplEx class use ver.globalTime() in
>>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>> @Override public long updateTime() {
>>> >>>>>>>> return ver.globalTime();
>>> >>>>>>>> }
>>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>> Than is better to replace this variable?
>>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>> 3 марта 2017 г., в 19:19, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]>
>>> написал(а):
>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>> I think the next implementation will be good enough:
>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() {
>>> >>>>>>>>> return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(nodeOrderDrId, topVer), order);
>>> >>>>>>>>> }
>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>> Serialization/deserialization of GridCacheVersion.globalTime
>>> field
>>> >>>>>>>>> should be removed.
>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 5:57 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
>>> [hidden email]>
>>> >>>>>> wrote:
>>> >>>>>>>>>> Alexey,
>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() {
>>> >>>>>>>>>> return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(nodeOrderDrId << 32, topVer <<
>>> 32),
>>> >>>>>> order);
>>> >>>>>>>>>> }
>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>> So you want to change or not?
>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>> And
>>> >>>>>>>>>> - GridCacheVersion.writeTo(ByteBuffer buf, MessageWriter
>>> writer)
>>> >>>>>>>>>> - GridCacheVersion.readFrom(ByteBuffer buf, MessageReader
>>> reader)
>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>> use globalTime variable, must be removed case 0: (in both
>>> methods) or
>>> >>>>>> replace globalTime?
>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>> 2 марта 2017 г., в 16:58, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]>
>>> написал(а):
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>> +1
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Removing of asGridUuid() method can lead to much code changes
>>> but it
>>> >>>>>>>>>>> should be avoided on this step.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 4:56 PM, Alexey Goncharuk
>>> >>>>>>>>>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I see several usages of asGridUuid() method, so I would just
>>> remove
>>> >>>>>> global
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> time and use nodeOrderDrId and topVer as different parts of
>>> high
>>> >>>>>> and low
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> parts of the embedded UUID.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> --AG
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> 2017-03-02 12:39 GMT+03:00 Kozlov Maxim <
>>> [hidden email]>:
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey,
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> When removed parameter globalTime, in method:
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() {
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(((long)topVer << 32) |
>>> >>>>>> nodeOrderDrId,
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> globalTime), order);
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> globalTime parameter replaced by something or remove this
>>> method?
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2 марта 2017 г., в 12:07, Kozlov Maxim <
>>> [hidden email]>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> написал(а):
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey,
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please review PR again.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 18:47, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]>
>>> >>>>>> написал(а):
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think that it is ok.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 6:34 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
>>> >>>>>> [hidden email]>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ok. What do you say for the rest?
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 18:15, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]
>>> >
>>> >>>>>> написал(а):
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think that during renaming we should not lose "Atomic"
>>> >>>>>> prefix.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 5:16 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
>>> >>>>>> [hidden email]>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey, ok.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Also remove in the modules/platform/dotnet
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode.cs?
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rename classes:
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.startGrids ->
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.startGridsLocal (commit)
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderWithStoreInvokeTest
>>> ->
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheWithStoreInvokeTest
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderInvokeTest ->
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheInvokeTest
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteO
>>> rderNearEnabledStoreValueTest
>>> >>>>>> ->
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheNearEnabledStoreValueTest
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderNearRemoveFailureTest
>>> ->
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheNearRemoveFailureTest
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderRemoveFailureTest ->
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheRemoveFailureTest
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderFailoverSelfTest ->
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheFailoverSelfTest
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheValueConsistencyAtomi
>>> cPrimaryWriteOrderNearEnabledS
>>> >>>>>> elfTest
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -> GridCacheValueConsistencyNearEnabledSelfTest
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryAsyncFailo
>>> verAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>>> >>>>>> ->
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryAsyncFailoverSelfTest
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryFailoverAt
>>> omicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>>> >>>>>> ->
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryFailoverSelfTest
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTe
>>> st.testNoBackupsPrimaryWriteOrder
>>> >>>>>> ->
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.testNoBackups
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.
>>> >>>>>> testWithBackupsPrimaryWriteOrder
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.testWithBackups
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Remove classes:
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderStoreValueTest
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheReplicatedAtomicPrima
>>> ryWriteOrderMultiNodeFullApiSe
>>> >>>>>> lfTest
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrd
>>> erMultiNodeFullApiSelfTest
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrd
>>> erMultiNodeP2PDisabledFullApiS
>>> >>>>>> elfTest
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWrityOrd
>>> erOffHeapMultiNodeFullApiSelfT
>>> >>>>>> est
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderOffHeapFullApiSelfTest
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderFullApiSelfTest
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderReloadAllSelfTest
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCachePutRetryAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheValueConsistencyAtomi
>>> cPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderExpiryPolicyTest
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ok? :)
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 2:04, Andrey Gura <
>>> [hidden email]>
>>> >>>>>> написал(а):
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No, it should be removed. If somebody use entry last
>>> update
>>> >>>>>> time
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> (e.g.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for conflict resolving) they should store this time
>>> as entry
>>> >>>>>> field.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 12:57 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Do we still need GridClockSyncProcessor?
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 5:26 AM, Andrey Gura <
>>> >>>>>> [hidden email]>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, this setting doesn't make sense anymore. So we
>>> need
>>> >>>>>> remove
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> all
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> related methods.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Also there is component called
>>> GridClockSyncProcessor that
>>> >>>>>> also
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> should
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be removed. It will lead to removing globalTime
>>> field from
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheVersion class and some related methods.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 3:21 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email]>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Valentin,
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then there is no need for setting
>>> CacheConfiguration.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> atomicWriteOrderMode.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What do you think, remove it and and related
>>> methods?
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 28 февр. 2017 г., в 2:49, Valentin Kulichenko <
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email]> написал(а):
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Max,
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In case we remove the CLOCK mode, I think we
>>> should
>>> >>>>>> remove the
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> enum
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> too, as
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> well as configuration properties and other code
>>> using
>>> >>>>>> this
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> enum. Having
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enum with one value doesn't make sense to me.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Val
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 5:09 AM, Kozlov Maxim <
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email]>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Igniters,
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> After remove CLOCK mode,
>>> CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode enum
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> contains now
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> only
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> one value PRIMARY. Andrey Gura, proposition
>>> remove
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode enum. Will there be
>>> something
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> special for
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> purpose is enum?
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jira: https://issues.apache.org/jira
>>> /browse/IGNITE-4587
>>> >>>>>> <
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira
>>> /browse/IGNITE-4587>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>> --
>>> >>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>> >>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>> --
>>> >>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>> >>>>>>>> Max K.
>>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> --
>>> >>>>>> Best Regards,
>>> >>>>>> Max K.
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> --
>>> >>> Best Regards,
>>> >>> Max K.
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>
>>> >> --
>>> >> Best Regards,
>>> >> Max K.
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Best Regards,
>>> Max K.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Alexey Kuznetsov
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Alexey Kuznetsov
> GridGain Systems
> www.gridgain.com

[Kozlov Maxim]

Hi igniters,

GridDhtAtomicCache class isFastMap method always returns false now.
Do you think you need to remove it?

> 14 марта 2017 г., в 14:30, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]> написал(а):
>
> I've added comments about IgniteConfiguration to JIRA ticket.
>
> On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 2:06 PM, Alexey Kuznetsov
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Maxim,
>>
>> I managed to review Web Console part in your PR.
>> Looks good for me.
>>
>> But it seems that you also should delete following properties on
>> IgniteConfiguration
>>  getClockSyncFrequency();
>>  getClockSyncSamples();
>>
>> Once you delete them - you should also delete them on WebConsole also.
>>
>> P.S. do not forget to merge master to you PR.
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 10:35 AM, Alexey Kuznetsov <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Maxim,
>>>
>>> Could you merge master to your PR?
>>> I failed to review Web Console files due to conflicts.
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>> On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 3:06 PM, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Andrey, Alexey, please review
>>>> PR - https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521 <
>>>> https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521>
>>>> tests - http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=Ignite
>>>> Tests_RunAll&branch_IgniteTests=pull%2F1521%2Fhead&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv
>>>> <http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=Ignit
>>>> eTests_RunAll&branch_IgniteTests=pull/1521/head&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv>
>>>>
>>>>> 7 марта 2017 г., в 14:15, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]> написал(а):
>>>>>
>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>
>>>>> all GridClockSyncProcessor related code should be remove (objects,
>>>>> messages, etc)
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 12:23 PM, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> Andrey, or better remove GridTimeSyncProcessorSelfTest class?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 7 марта 2017 г., в 12:21, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>
>>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Andrey, in GridTimeSyncProcessorSelfTest class methods:
>>>> testTimeSync() and testTimeSyncChangeCoordinator() also removed?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 6 марта 2017 г., в 18:42, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> About SER_VER_COMPARATOR. You can use code branch that executes when
>>>>>>>> times are equal:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> int nodeOrder1 = ver1.nodeOrder();
>>>>>>>> int nodeOrder2 = ver2.nodeOrder();
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> if (nodeOrder1 == nodeOrder2) {
>>>>>>>> long order1 = ver1.order();
>>>>>>>> long order2 = ver2.order();
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> assert order1 != order2;
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> return order1 > order2 ? 1 : -1;
>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>> else
>>>>>>>> return nodeOrder1 > nodeOrder2 ? 1 : -1;
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 6:32 PM, Alexey Goncharuk
>>>>>>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Global time comparison is only needed for CLOCK mode, so you should
>>>> modify
>>>>>>>>> the code as if ignoreTime is always true.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 2017-03-06 18:13 GMT+03:00 Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]>:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> ok,
>>>>>>>>>> in GridCacheAtomicVersionComparator class, method
>>>>>>>>>> compare(GridCacheVersion one, GridCacheVersion other, boolean
>>>> ignoreTime)
>>>>>>>>>> if (globalTime == otherGlobalTime || ignoreTime) {  // => if
>>>> (ignoreTime) {
>>>>>>>>>> .....
>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>> else
>>>>>>>>>> return globalTime > otherGlobalTime ? 1 : -1;   // => return -1;
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> and,
>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheMvcc class,
>>>>>>>>>> SER_VER_COMPARATOR is comparator by globalTime var. His remove and
>>>> remove
>>>>>>>>>> compareSerializableVersion?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> 6 марта 2017 г., в 16:51, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]>
>>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> updateTime() method should be removed.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 12:12 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> In CacheEntryImplEx class use ver.globalTime() in
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> @Override public long updateTime() {
>>>>>>>>>>>> return ver.globalTime();
>>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Than is better to replace this variable?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3 марта 2017 г., в 19:19, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]>
>>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think the next implementation will be good enough:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() {
>>>>>>>>>>>>> return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(nodeOrderDrId, topVer), order);
>>>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Serialization/deserialization of GridCacheVersion.globalTime
>>>> field
>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be removed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 5:57 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Alexey,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() {
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(nodeOrderDrId << 32, topVer <<
>>>> 32),
>>>>>>>>>> order);
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So you want to change or not?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - GridCacheVersion.writeTo(ByteBuffer buf, MessageWriter
>>>> writer)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - GridCacheVersion.readFrom(ByteBuffer buf, MessageReader
>>>> reader)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> use globalTime variable, must be removed case 0: (in both
>>>> methods) or
>>>>>>>>>> replace globalTime?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2 марта 2017 г., в 16:58, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]>
>>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Removing of asGridUuid() method can lead to much code changes
>>>> but it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be avoided on this step.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 4:56 PM, Alexey Goncharuk
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I see several usages of asGridUuid() method, so I would just
>>>> remove
>>>>>>>>>> global
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> time and use nodeOrderDrId and topVer as different parts of
>>>> high
>>>>>>>>>> and low
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> parts of the embedded UUID.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --AG
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2017-03-02 12:39 GMT+03:00 Kozlov Maxim <
>>>> [hidden email]>:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> When removed parameter globalTime, in method:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() {
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(((long)topVer << 32) |
>>>>>>>>>> nodeOrderDrId,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> globalTime), order);
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> globalTime parameter replaced by something or remove this
>>>> method?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2 марта 2017 г., в 12:07, Kozlov Maxim <
>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please review PR again.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 18:47, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]>
>>>>>>>>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think that it is ok.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 6:34 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ok. What do you say for the rest?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 18:15, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think that during renaming we should not lose "Atomic"
>>>>>>>>>> prefix.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 5:16 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey, ok.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Also remove in the modules/platform/dotnet
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode.cs?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rename classes:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.startGrids ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.startGridsLocal (commit)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderWithStoreInvokeTest
>>>> ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheWithStoreInvokeTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderInvokeTest ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheInvokeTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteO
>>>> rderNearEnabledStoreValueTest
>>>>>>>>>> ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheNearEnabledStoreValueTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderNearRemoveFailureTest
>>>> ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheNearRemoveFailureTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderRemoveFailureTest ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheRemoveFailureTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderFailoverSelfTest ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheFailoverSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheValueConsistencyAtomi
>>>> cPrimaryWriteOrderNearEnabledS
>>>>>>>>>> elfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -> GridCacheValueConsistencyNearEnabledSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryAsyncFailo
>>>> verAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>> ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryAsyncFailoverSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryFailoverAt
>>>> omicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>> ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryFailoverSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTe
>>>> st.testNoBackupsPrimaryWriteOrder
>>>>>>>>>> ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.testNoBackups
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.
>>>>>>>>>> testWithBackupsPrimaryWriteOrder
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.testWithBackups
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Remove classes:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderStoreValueTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheReplicatedAtomicPrima
>>>> ryWriteOrderMultiNodeFullApiSe
>>>>>>>>>> lfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrd
>>>> erMultiNodeFullApiSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrd
>>>> erMultiNodeP2PDisabledFullApiS
>>>>>>>>>> elfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWrityOrd
>>>> erOffHeapMultiNodeFullApiSelfT
>>>>>>>>>> est
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderOffHeapFullApiSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderFullApiSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderReloadAllSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCachePutRetryAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheValueConsistencyAtomi
>>>> cPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderExpiryPolicyTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ok? :)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 2:04, Andrey Gura <
>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>>>>>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No, it should be removed. If somebody use entry last
>>>> update
>>>>>>>>>> time
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (e.g.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for conflict resolving) they should store this time
>>>> as entry
>>>>>>>>>> field.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 12:57 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Do we still need GridClockSyncProcessor?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 5:26 AM, Andrey Gura <
>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, this setting doesn't make sense anymore. So we
>>>> need
>>>>>>>>>> remove
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> related methods.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Also there is component called
>>>> GridClockSyncProcessor that
>>>>>>>>>> also
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be removed. It will lead to removing globalTime
>>>> field from
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheVersion class and some related methods.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 3:21 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Valentin,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then there is no need for setting
>>>> CacheConfiguration.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> atomicWriteOrderMode.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What do you think, remove it and and related
>>>> methods?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 28 февр. 2017 г., в 2:49, Valentin Kulichenko <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email]> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Max,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In case we remove the CLOCK mode, I think we
>>>> should
>>>>>>>>>> remove the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enum
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> too, as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> well as configuration properties and other code
>>>> using
>>>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enum. Having
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enum with one value doesn't make sense to me.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Val
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 5:09 AM, Kozlov Maxim <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Igniters,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> After remove CLOCK mode,
>>>> CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode enum
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contains now
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> only
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> one value PRIMARY. Andrey Gura, proposition
>>>> remove
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode enum. Will there be
>>>> something
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> special for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> purpose is enum?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jira: https://issues.apache.org/jira
>>>> /browse/IGNITE-4587
>>>>>>>>>> <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira
>>>> /browse/IGNITE-4587>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Best Regards,
>>>> Max K.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Alexey Kuznetsov
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Alexey Kuznetsov
>> GridGain Systems
>> www.gridgain.com

--
Best Regards,
Max K.

[dmagda]

Maxim, Andrey G., Igniters,

What if go further and remove CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode enum from the public API at all? I see no sense to keep it for the only one option left - PRIMARY.

Any objections?

—
Denis

> On Feb 27, 2017, at 8:09 AM, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Hi Igniters,
>
> After remove CLOCK mode, CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode enum contains now only one value PRIMARY. Andrey Gura, proposition remove CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode enum. Will there be something special for this purpose is enum?
>
> jira: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4587 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4587>
>
> --
> Best Regards,
> Max K.
>
>
>
>

[Kozlov Maxim]

Denis,

CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode enum already removed.

> 30 марта 2017 г., в 7:38, Denis Magda <[hidden email]> написал(а):
>
> Maxim, Andrey G., Igniters,
>
> What if go further and remove CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode enum from the public API at all? I see no sense to keep it for the only one option left - PRIMARY.
>
> Any objections?
>
> —
> Denis
>
>> On Feb 27, 2017, at 8:09 AM, Kozlov Maxim <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Igniters,
>>
>> After remove CLOCK mode, CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode enum contains now only one value PRIMARY. Andrey Gura, proposition remove CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode enum. Will there be something special for this purpose is enum?
>>
>> jira: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4587 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4587>
>>
>> --
>> Best Regards,
>> Max K.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>

--
Best Regards,
Max K.