Hi all Updates on this issue - We found that the periodic removal of system_properties (while the ingestion is running) leads to graph corruption (mentioned at high level at

What do you think? Sounds great Would such a deadline be OK? I think it is good idea to have a deadline. Von: janusgraph-dev@... <janusgraph-dev@...> im Auftrag von Oleksandr Porunov

I am good with waiting for TinkerPop 3.4.11 or 3.5.0 if we expect those releases soon, but I don't want to delay 0.6.0 release too much because the community sometimes asks for the release. Also, if

If we wait for TinkerPop 3.5.0 (or 3.4.11), we can probably also release the configurable batch sizes in 0.6.0 which should bring a noticable performance gain if used properly. Kind regards, Florian

Hi I would be great to release JanusGraph 0.6.0. I just want to mention that TinkerPop 3.5.0 is planed to be released in April. We don't release new version in frequent time span, so should we wait

Thanks for organizing this, Oleksandr! I would like to have Fix potential ThreadLocal transaction leak released in 0.6.0. If there is no further comment I plan to merge it this weekend. Graph

Hi everyone, I would like to start a discussion about JanusGraph 0.6.0 release. There were multiple requests from the community about ETA of 0.6.0 release. I wanted to check if there are any features

Hi Marc I've submitted this as a bug https://github.com/JanusGraph/janusgraph/issues/2515 Thanks

This discussion also plays on: https://lists.lfaidata.foundation/g/janusgraph-users/topic/multiple_vertices_generated/81197948

This discussion also plays on: https://lists.lfaidata.foundation/g/janusgraph-users/topic/performance_issue_large/81197952?p=,,,20,0,0,0::recentpostdate%2Fsticky,,,20,2,0,81197952

Hi JG community We are facing a weird issue with Replication factor 3 with scylla DB as backend. - we are using index for looking up V in the graph - observation is that for many vertices with the

Hi @simone We were planning to segregate the static configurations from the runtime dynamic configurations (last update TS from client, etc.). AFAIK only the static configurations are required by the

HI @sauverma, nice, we are truncating the table, too. It's good to have your confirmation that it could safely workaround the issue. We will analyze the `gc_grace_seconds` setting now. Just for

In scylla grafana board, this issue is seen with high number of foreground read tasks.

Thank you folks for getting back. @Simone3, yes this issue comes out as read timeout from the shard holding the system_properties table (there is only 1 partition for system_properties

Hi all We are using janusgraph at zeotap at humongous scale (~70B V and 50B E) backed by scylla. Right now I am facing an issue in janusgraph_ids table, wherein there are large partitions created in

Hi Saurabh, we are experiencing the exact same issue: spark job with one janusgraph instance per partition calling a scylladb cluster. Our symptom is a ton of timeout exceptions due to missing QUORUM

Hi Saurabh! Thanks for reporting that issue! Looking at the open pull requests, I don't see one that addresses this problem. You're always welcome to share your solutions by discussing them here or

Hi all - The interaction with the underlying KV store via janusgraph client hits the `system_properties` table with a range query where the key is `configuration` (key = 0x636f6e66696775726174696f6e)

Ahh. Actually think I may have answered my own question building from source. Looks like hadoop:2.7.7 and spark-gremlin:3.4.10 are still using netty 3 and the POM just bumped to the latest netty 3