ignite-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ilya Kasnacheev <ilya.kasnach...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Let's remove ignite-schedule module and IgniteScheduler interface
Date Tue, 24 Dec 2019 07:28:26 GMT
Hello!

I did not find the exact information but I can confirm that ignite-schedule
1.0.0 may see some downloads, but that's all. Since 1.0.0 we don't publish
this artifact so its usage also remains a mystery.

Regards,
-- 
Ilya Kasnacheev


пн, 23 дек. 2019 г. в 22:37, Denis Magda <dmagda@apache.org>:

> https://repository.apache.org
>
> At least Ignite PMC has access to data.
>
> -
> Denis
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 23, 2019 at 11:35 AM Ilya Kasnacheev <
> ilya.kasnacheev@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hello!
> >
> > Can you guide me where these downloads are from? We don't seem to publish
> > ignite-schedule to Maven Central since early 1.x.
> >
> > Regards,
> > --
> > Ilya Kasnacheev
> >
> >
> > сб, 21 дек. 2019 г. в 03:20, Denis Magda <dmagda@apache.org>:
> >
> > > Ilya, good points, then support the idea of the API removal in 3.0.
> > >
> > > Ivan, downloaded the screenshot to Google Drive:
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/1N21N7yqCbeZtCNs1sHvJLiJfHF_Hp0wd/view?usp=sharing
> > >
> > >
> > > -
> > > Denis
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Dec 20, 2019 at 7:09 AM Ilya Kasnacheev <
> > ilya.kasnacheev@gmail.com
> > > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hello!
> > > >
> > > > This module has two obvious downsides:
> > > >
> > > > - It's LGPL.
> > > > - It can only schedule locally.
> > > >
> > > > We could fix 1) by using other implementation, but given 2) this no
> > > longer
> > > > sounds feasible. If someone wants to use local scheduler, why not
> just
> > > use
> > > > it directly?
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > --
> > > > Ilya Kasnacheev
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > пт, 20 дек. 2019 г. в 10:26, Ivan Pavlukhin <vololo100@gmail.com>:
> > > >
> > > > > Denis,
> > > > >
> > > > > > The API is definitely used with even higher demand for the last
> > > months
> > > > > (overall the demand is comparable to Ignite Kafka and ML). See
> > > > attachment.
> > > > > I do not see the attachement. Where can I find it?
> > > > >
> > > > > чт, 19 дек. 2019 г. в 20:01, Denis Magda <dmagda@apache.org>:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The API is definitely used with even higher demand for the last
> > > months
> > > > > (overall the demand is comparable to Ignite Kafka and ML). See
> > > > attachment.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If the module has some problems let's discuss them separately
and
> > see
> > > > > how to approach first. Do we have a list of the issues tracked
> > > anywhere?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -
> > > > > > Denis
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 8:52 AM Valentin Kulichenko <
> > > > > valentin.kulichenko@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Ivan,
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> IGFS and Hadoop Accelerator had inherent architectural flaws
-
> the
> > > > vast
> > > > > >> majority of users who tried to use these features failed
to
> > achieve
> > > > > >> expected results. And yes, at the same time the interest
was
> very
> > > > high,
> > > > > so
> > > > > >> we really needed to take action :)
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Scheduler module, on the other hand, works as expected and
might
> > be
> > > > > used by
> > > > > >> someone. There is no need to hurry.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> It probably makes sense to deprecate the functionality in
2.8 so
> > > that
> > > > > users
> > > > > >> are aware of upcoming removal. But the removal itself should
> > happen
> > > in
> > > > > the
> > > > > >> major release.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> -Val
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 12:09 AM Ivan Pavlukhin <
> > > vololo100@gmail.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> > Guys,
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > Why some of us are so critical regarding the subject?
If I
> > recall
> > > > > >> > correctly we decided to drop IGFS and Hadoop support
before
> 2.8
> > > > > >> > without much debate. And it was a feature users were
> interested
> > > in.
> > > > I
> > > > > >> > never saw an interest to IgniteSchedule. My statistics
is
> based
> > on
> > > > our
> > > > > >> > User mailing list.
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > чт, 19 дек. 2019 г. в 11:00, Alexey Kuznetsov
<
> > > > akuznetsov@apache.org
> > > > > >:
> > > > > >> > >
> > > > > >> > > I will vote "+1" for 3.0
> > > > > >> > >
> > > > > >> > > On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 10:57 AM Anton Vinogradov
<
> > > av@apache.org>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >> > >
> > > > > >> > > > My Vote was for 3.0
> > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > >> > > > On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 10:44 AM Valentin
Kulichenko <
> > > > > >> > > > valentin.kulichenko@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > Is this suggested for 3.0 or 2.8?
> > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > I tend to agree with Alexey - API compatibility
should
> be
> > > > > preserved
> > > > > >> > > > within
> > > > > >> > > > > a major version. I would oppose doing
such a change in
> > 2.x.
> > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > If this is planned for 3.0, then it's
a definite +1 from
> > me.
> > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > -Val
> > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > On Wed, Dec 18, 2019 at 11:34 PM Alexey
Kuznetsov <
> > > > > >> > akuznetsov@apache.org
> > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > Hi!
> > > > > >> > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > What if some users already using
this module?
> > > > > >> > > > > > What they should do? Rewrite code?
> > > > > >> > > > > > I do not think it is a good idea.
> > > > > >> > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > My "-1" here.
> > > > > >> > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 8:53 AM
Anton Vinogradov <
> > > > > av@apache.org>
> > > > > >> > > > wrote:
> > > > > >> > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > ignite-schedule does not look
to be properly located
> > or
> > > > > useful.
> > > > > >> > > > > > > My +1 here.
> > > > > >> > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 8:35
AM Ivan Pavlukhin <
> > > > > >> > vololo100@gmail.com>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >> > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > Ilya,
> > > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > I think it is a good
initiative! Do we really need
> > to
> > > > keep
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > run/callLocall methods
at all?
> > > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > ср, 18 дек. 2019
г. в 17:59, Ilya Kasnacheev <
> > > > > ilyak@apache.org
> > > > > >> > >:
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Hello!
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Since 2.8 is branched,
I want to initiate the
> > > > discussion
> > > > > >> > about
> > > > > >> > > > > > removal
> > > > > >> > > > > > > of
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > ignite-schedule
module.
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > My plan as follows:
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Remove ignite-schedule
module entirely.
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Move runLocal and
callLocal methods from
> > > > > IgniteScheduler to
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > IgniteCompute.
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Delete IgniteScheduler
interface with its
> > remaining
> > > > > >> > > > scheduleLocal()
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > methods.
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Rationale: Ignite
is not a tool for local
> > > scheduling,
> > > > > >> > > > > IgniteScheduler
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > does
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > not provide any
means of remote scheduling, and
> I
> > > > don't
> > > > > think
> > > > > >> > > > > anybody
> > > > > >> > > > > > > is
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > using that (especially
since ignite-schedule is
> > > > > unpublished
> > > > > >> > LGPL
> > > > > >> > > > > > > module).
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > I would like to
hear opinions as well as
> positive
> > > and
> > > > > >> > negative
> > > > > >> > > > > votes
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > towards this. If
I won't see any activity, I
> will
> > go
> > > > > forward
> > > > > >> > with
> > > > > >> > > > > > JIRA
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > issue.
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Previous discussion:
> > > > > >> > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-5565
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > We tried to move
it to Quartz but it changed
> > > semantics
> > > > > in
> > > > > >> > some
> > > > > >> > > > > ways.
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > Best regards,
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > Ivan Pavlukhin
> > > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > --
> > > > > >> > > > > > Alexey Kuznetsov
> > > > > >> > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > >> > >
> > > > > >> > >
> > > > > >> > > --
> > > > > >> > > Alexey Kuznetsov
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > --
> > > > > >> > Best regards,
> > > > > >> > Ivan Pavlukhin
> > > > > >> >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Best regards,
> > > > > Ivan Pavlukhin
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

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