ignite-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrak...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Ignite 2.0 tasks/roadmap
Date Thu, 14 Jul 2016 13:26:41 GMT
Vova, why Unsafe removal? To my knowledge, Unsafe still remains in Java 9,
no?

On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 4:09 PM, Vladimir Ozerov <vozerov@gridgain.com>
wrote:

> Several points from my side:
> 1) Java 9 support - Unsafe removal, modules, etc..
> 2) Rework our "messages" subsystem - we always read/write all fields, thus
> transferring lots of zeros without any reason. We should support branching.
> 3) Review all messages (especially cache, double-especially - atomic) in
> terms of performance. Most probably we will refactor/split some of them.
>
> 14 июля 2016 г. 12:06 пользователь "Yakov Zhdanov" <yzhdanov@apache.org>
> написал:
>
> > Alex, a lot of excitement for Ignite-2.0 from my side! =)
> >
> > I agree with your points and I will take a close look at them in the
> > nearest future.
> >
> > Here are some suggestions from me.
> >
> > I don't remember if I shared my thoughts on moving to single TCP port per
> > node. So, I filed a new ticket -
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-3480. If we already have
> > another one let's merge them.
> >
> > I would also think over removing communication SPI and discovery SPI and
> > introducing communication and discovery processors instead. In some
> places
> > Ignite pretty much relies on internal implementation details of these
> SPIs
> > which makes implementation of any other SPI pretty complex task. Btw, did
> > anyone did that? Removing SPIs will allow us to cleanup the code and use
> > common abstractions and logic.
> >
> > I will give some more ideas going forward.
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > --Yakov
> >
> > 2016-07-14 4:43 GMT+03:00 Alexey Goncharuk <alexey.goncharuk@gmail.com>:
> >
> > > So, no excitement about Ignite 2.0? :)
> > >
> > > I went ahead and created a 2.0 version in Ignite Jira, and included the
> > > following tickets so far based on the chance that this ticket will
> > require
> > > breaking changes in APIs/Configuration
> > >  - IGNITE-3469 - Get rid of deprecated APIs and code
> > >  - IGNTIE-3477 - Rework offheap storage
> > >  - IGNITE-3478 - Transactional SQL
> > >  - IGNITE-1605 - Provide stronger data loss check
> > >  - IGNITE-3306 - Extend IgniteCluster interface with the methods to
> send
> > > and receive custom discovery events
> > >
> > > I believe that there are many more changes that we wanted to make but
> > > delayed because they would break binary compatibility, so if you have
> > > something in mind - it's time to create a ticket or assign it to 2.0 if
> > it
> > > exists. It's good to know the scope of work.
> > >
> > > Also, it would be great if you review/comment the above-mentioned
> > tickets.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > AG
> > >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message